Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2014 


https://archive.org/details/rationalbuildingOOviol 


RATIONAL  BUILDING 


BEING  A  TRANSLATION  OF  THE 
.   ARTICLE  "CONSTRUCTION"  IN 
THE    DICTIONNAIRE  RAISONNE 
DE  L'  ARCHITECTURE  FRANCAISE 

OF 

M.  EUGENE-EMMANUEL  VIOLLET-LE-DUC 


BY  • 

George  Martin  Huss 

ARCHITECT 

Member  of  the  Architectural  League  of  New  York. 


M ACMILL AN  AND  CO. 

AND  LONDON 

1895 


Copyright,  1894 
By  MAGMILLAN  AND  CO. 


TYPOGRAPHY  AND PRESSWORK 
S.  J.  PARKHILL  &  CO.,  BOSTON,  U.  S.  A. 


JhE  GfTTY  CENTER 
LIBRARY 


DEDICATED  TO 

FLORENCE  CHAUNCEY  RICE 

ACKNOWLEDGMENT    OF     THE     INDUSTRIOUS    PATIENCE  AND 
VALUABLE  ASSISTANCE  RENDERED  TO  THE  TRANSLATOR 
IN  THE  PREPARATION  OF  THIS  WORK. 


PREFACE. 


WHILE  preparing  drawings  for  a  large  Cathedral  Church 
in  New  York  City,  the  article  k-  Construction  "  of  the 
"  Dictionnaire  Raisonne  "  was  freely  used  and  then 
the  idea  was  conceived  of  translating  it  into  Euglish. 

It  has  been  appearing  from  time  to  time  in  the  pages  of  a 
prominent  architectural  journal.  Strange  as  it  may  seem,  this 
section,  which  is  as  valuable  as  any  in  the  dictionary  to  archi- 
tects, archaeologists  and  general  readers,  has  never  before  been 
completely  translated  into  English,  although  often  attempted. 

Great  care  has  been  exercised  to  obtain  nice  distinctions  of 
meaning ;  the  full  force  of  the  French  idiom  has  been  seized 
upon,  and  the  endeavor  has  been  to  make  this  work  appear  as 
little  like  a  bald  technical  translation  as  was  consistent  with 
the  incisively  keen  remarks  of  the  gifted  author. 

Eugene-Emmanuel  Viollet-le  Due  was  an  architect  and  was 
born  in  Paris  the  27th  day  of  January,  1814. 

He  first  studied  architecture  under  Leclere,  and  became 
particularly  interested  in  Gothic  architecture,  the  serious  study 
of  which  he  pursued  under  the  triple  aspect  of  civil,  religious 
and  military  constructions. 

He  also  delved  among  the  ruins  of  Greek  and  Roman  art  in 
Italy  and  Sicily,  notably  at  Rome  and  at  Taormina. 

Afterward  he  visited  the  South  of  F ranee,  and  made  draw- 
ings of  the  principal  monuments  at  Carcassonne,  at  Sens  and 
at  Toulouse. 


vi 


PRE  FA  CE. 


Being  Iiispector-of-the- works  of  Sainte  Cbapelle  about  1840 
with  Lassus,  under  the  direction  of  Duban,  he  undertook  the 
restoration  of  the  former  abbey-church  of  Vezelay  under 
orders  from  the  Commission  for  Historical  Monuments,  depend- 
ent at  that  time  upon  the  Minister  of  the  Interior. 

In  the  next  eight  years  he  was  employed  in  the  restoration 
of  the  churches  of  Saint  Pere,  of  Montreale  (Yonne)  ;  of  the 
Town-hall  of  Saint  Antonin  (Tarn  et  Garonne)  ;  of  St.  Mi- 
chael at  Carcassonne  ;  of  the  Town-hall  of  Narbonne,  besides 
the  churches  at  Poissy  (Seine-et-Oise)  and  Semur  in  the 
Cote  d'Or. 

The  restoration  of  Notre  Dame  at  Paris  and  the  construction 
of  the  new  sacristy  were  the  result  of  a  competition  begun  in 
1845  ;  in  this  work  he  was  associated  with  Lassus.  He  finally 
completed  the  restoration  of  this  basilica  in  1856  with  some 
interior  paintings. 

In  1846,  he  was  chosen  as  architect  of  the  Abbey  of  Saint 
Denis;  in  1849  he  undertook  the  restoration  of  the  fortifica- 
tions of  Carcassonne,  the  works  of  the  Cathedral  of  Amiens 
and  those  of  the  Chapter-house  at  Sens. 

He  conducted  or  directed  the  restoration  of  Notre  Dame  de 
Chalons-sur-Marne,  of  the  Cathedral  of  Laon  and  of  the  Cha- 
teau of  Pierrefonds,  after  being  appointed  in  1853  one  of  the 
three  inspectors-general  charged  with  the  administration  of 
worship  in  the  diocesan  service  of  France. 

At  the  end  of  1863,  he  was  appointed  Professor  of  the 
History  of  Art  and  Aesthetics  in  the  reorganized  Ecole  des 
Beaux-Arts,  but  on  account  of  the  unruly  conduct  of  the 
students,  who  were  dissatisfied  with  the  plan  of  reorganization 
as  adopted  by  the  Government  and  because  they  (the  students) 
had  not  been  consulted,  he  was  compelled  to  leave  and  was 
replaced  by  M.  H.  Taine. 

At  this  time,  M.  Viollet-le-Duc  was  one  of  the  familiar 
habitues  of  the  Tuileries  and  at  Compiegne,  and  was  one  of 
the  most  heeded  counsellors  of  the  Empress. 

During  the  siege  of  Paris,  the  artist  became  engineer  and 


PREFACE. 


%  vii 


took  an  active  part  in  the  organization  of  the  auxiliary  corps 
of  the  fortification,  which,  under  his  command  and  that  of  M. 
Alphand,  rendered  great  services  for  the  defence.  Soon  after, 
he  abandoned  his  old  political  opinions  and  joined  the  ranks  of 
the  advanced  Republican  party,  and  while  in  this  party,  he  was 
elected  a  Municipal  Counsellor  for  the  district  of  the  Faubourg- 
Montmarte,  in  1874. 

He  resigned  his  inspector-generalship  of  diocesan  edifices, 
demanded  full  and  complete  amnesty  as  general  counsellor  of 
the  Seine  and  praised  the  forbearance  of  the  Democrats  at  the 
general  elections  of  February,  1876,  in  the  ninth  arrondisse- 
ment  of  Paris  where  M.  Thiers  resided. 

Although  he  had  contributed  to  the  Dix-Neuvieme  Steele  since 
its  foundation,  he  gave  it  up  at  this  time  as  being  too  conserva- 
tive, but  renewed  his  connection  the  following  year. 

It  was  upon  his  report  as  a  member  of  the  Higher  Commis- 
sions for  International  Exhibitions  that  the  plans  of  the  palaces 
in  the  Champs-de-Mars  and  on  the  Trocadero  were  adopted  for 
the  Exposition  of  1878,  united  as  they  were  by  a  gallery  over 
the  bridge  of  Jena.  In  January,  1878,  he  was  reelected 
Municipal  Counsellor  and  occupied  himself  especially  with 
questions  relating  to  the  Fine  Arts,  and  he  proposed  to  multi- 
ply statues  of  great  men  in  Paris.  He  also  sought  to  justify 
the  use  of  the  Phrygian  cap  on  the  statues  of  Liberty  (Febru- 
ary, 1879). 

M.  Viollet-le-Duc  died  suddenly  at  his  country-house  near 
Lausanne  (Switzerland),  the  17th  of  September,  1879,  and 
was  interred  without  any  religious  ceremony. 

Amongst  the  numerous  and  valuable  contributions  he  has 
left  us,  is  the  "  Dictionnaire  Raisonne  de  V Architecture  "  from 
which  the  article  "  Construction  "  is  taken.  It  will  be  seen 
that  his  wide  practical  experience,  as  well  as  varied  travel  and 
study,  give  his  thoughts  and  deductions  an  authority  rarely 
found,  but  which  it  is  hoped  will  be  duly  appreciated  in  the 
following  pages.  George  Martin  Huss. 

New  YORK,  January,  1895. 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  I. 

General  View.  —  Gr^ek  and  Roman  Construction. —  Rompn  beton. 

—  Monument  of  Carlovingian  period.  —  Vaults  dominant  in  Ro- 
man Empire.  —  Roman  methods  approached  by  Carlovingian  Con- 
structors.—  Efforts  do  not  constitute  art.  —  Builders  during  the 
Middle  Ages  were  not  barbarians.  —  No  party  spirit  in  Archi- 
tecture.—  A  Building  cannot  be  fanatical.  —  Roman  Builders 
made  requisitions ;  which  could  not  be  done  by  the  Builders  of 
the  Middle  Ages  Page  1 

CHAPTER  II. 

Principles.  —  The  Order  of  St.  Benedict  tried  to  reform  society. — 
They  could  not  use  Roman  method  of  building,  but  pursued  a 
middle  course.  —  Roman  buildings  had  absolute  stability  of  points 
of  support. — Romanesque  Architects  wished  to  vault  like  the 
Romans.  —  Instead  of  concrete,  used  hewn  stones  sunk  in  mortar. 

—  Buttresses  to  reinforce  the  walls.  —  Transverse  arches  under 
Cradle  Vaults.  — Builders  had  not  yet  solved  the  problem  of  sta- 
bility of  vaults  Page  16 

CHAPTER  III. 

Roman  and  Romanesque  Vaults.  —  Geometric  drawing  too  com- 
plicated for  Romanesque  Builders. —  Errors  in  vault  building 
formed  most  fertile  principles  in  history  of  construction.  —  Pro- 
jecting diagonal  groins.  —  Blind  efforts  led  to  Ellipsoidal  Vaults. 

—  Gothic  was  predestined  consequence  of  Romanesque  Arehi- 
tecture.  —  R  >man  groined  vault  laid  aside  in  eleventh  century. 

—  Introduction  of  transverse  arches  as  vital  force.  —  Comparison 
between  Roman  and  Romanesque  methods  of  placing  arches  upon 
columns  Page  24 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

Origin  of  the  Pointed  Arch.  —  Formation  of  transverse  arch 
by  two  circular  arcs  leads  to  far-reaching  consequences.  —  Pointed 
arch  is  a  revolution  in  history  of  art  of  building.  —  False 
pointed  arches. —  Romanesque  builders  do  not  theorize  about 
religious  character  of  pointed  arch.  —  Porch  of  Vezelay  best  shows 
transition  from  Romanesque  to  Gothic  system  of  construction. 

—  Original  so-called  Gothic  vaults.  —  Ogival  arches  wrongly 
called  broken  arches. — Gothic  builders  profited  by  results  of 
new  methods. — Gothic  builders  did  not  discover  the  broken  arch. 

—  They  were  the  inventors  of  a  new  system  of  construction  in 
which  the  broken  arch  was  applied.  —  No  Gothic  construction 
in  twelfth  century  except  in  France.  —  New  inventions  not  always 
utilized  Page  39 

CHAPTER  V. 

Development  of  Principles.  —  All  human  conceptions  tainted 
with  error.  —  Construction  of  buildings  confronted  by  most  seri- 
ous difficulties.  —  Two  seemingly  antagonistic  principles.  —  Want 
of  foresight  in  Romanesque  construction.  —  Angels  or  saints  only 
help  the  building  of  vaults  in  dreams.  —  Faith  is  not  sufficient  in 
building.  —  Monkish  chronicles  praise  Romanesque  monuments, 
but  are  silent  when  Architecture  passes  from  the  Cloisters  to  the 
Laity.  —  Records  of  Notre  Dame  at  Paris.  —  Historical  questions 
no  longer  decided  by  affirmations  or  negations.  —  Powerful  lay- 
school  of  builders  at  end  of  twelfth  century.  —  Designing  a  build- 
ing by  beginning  at  the  vault. — Equilibrium  of  forces  substi- 
tuted for  principle  of  inert  stability.  —  Traditions  not  shaken  off 
in  a  day.  —  Processes  of  construction.  —  Twelve  hundred  years 
reasonable  duration  for  a  building.  —  Elasticity  demanded  in  all 
the  members  of  buildings  showing  considerable  voids  as  com- 
pared with  solids  on  ground-plan. — All  weighted  points  should 
preserve  independent  functions.  —  Absolute  formulas  not  adopted 
in  Gothic  construction. —  Equilibrium.  —  Use  of  cast-iron. — 
Beauty  not  linked  to  one  (single)  form.  —  Because  the  multitude 
only  sees  Gothic  ornamentation  does  not  prove  that  Gothic  construc- 
tion can  no  longer  find  an  application.  Gothic  construction  is 
supple  and  as  inquiring  as  the  modern  spirit ;  it  is  never  stopped 
by  a  difficulty ;  it  is  ingenious.  —  Gothic  builders  are  reasoners. 

—  Romans  built  as  bees.  —  Gothic  builders  could  make  a  house 
out  of  pasteboard.  —  Thorough  knowledge  of  the  past  prepares 
for  the  future.  —  Regard  for  appearances  is  the  common  weak- 
ness of  France  ,  Page  57 

CHAPTER  VI. 

Vaults.  —  Experience  precedes  theory ;  fact  precedes  law.  — 
Curve  of  pressures  deduced  by  theory. — Thrust  of  arches. — 
Formula  in  sixteenth  century.  —  Monocylindrical  columns  rarely 
put  out  of  shape.  —  Construction  from  complicated  principles 
brings  complicated  consequences.  —  What  Romans  had  not  done, 
was  attempted  by  Romanesque  builders.  —  Two  methods  of  neu- 
tralizing thrust  of  vaults.  —  Perfect  stability  of  supports.  — 


CONTENTS. 


xi 


Overcoming  thrust  into  space. —  Subtlety  of  early  Gothic  builders. 
—  Vaulting  large  and  high  buildings  with  interior  slender  sup- 
ports.—  Moderation  of  He -de -France  Architects.  — Exaggera- 
tions of  Architects  of  Champagne  and  Burgundy.  —  Details  of 
Vault  building.  —  Flying  buttresses,  diagonal  and  transverse 
arches.  —  Normans  were  clever  builders.  —  General  principle 
must  precede  varieties  and  exceptions.  —  Method  of  building  a 
vault.  —  Indigenous  to  Ile-de-France.  —  In  Burgundy  less  ra- 
tional means  used. —  Gothic  system  of  construction,  adopted  in 
all  western  provinces  of  continent.  —  In  France,  surface  of  filling 
always  concave.  —  In  England,  convex  or  series  of  reversed 
curvilinear  cones.  —  People  who  do  not  understand  must  not 
criticise  building.  Gothic  architecture  may  not  please,  but  it  is 
not  the  product  of  ignorance  and  chance.  —  Architects  in  the 
sixteenth  century  used  slabs  resting  on  ribs  for  vaults.  —  Indi- 
viduality of  people  shown  in  their  works  of  art.  —  Normans  ap- 
propriated their  neighbors'  discoveries   Page  88 

CHAPTER  VII. 

Materials.  —  Young  nations  build  durably.  —  Older  nations  con- 
tent with  transitory  constructions.  —  Middle  Ages  compound  of 
Youth  and  Decrepitude.  —  Gothic  builders  having  no  documents 
used  keenness  of  intelligence  and  experience  to  guide  them.  — 
Building-stone  was  just  as  dear  in  the  twelfth  century  as  now.  — 
Hand-work  was  very  inexpensive.  —  France  abounds  in  ledges  of 
excellent  limestone.  —  Certain  hard  stones  were  thin  courses 
of  limestone.  —  During  the  Middle  Ages,  beds  of  stone  were  cut 
as  carefully  as  exposed  facings  Page  167 

CHAPTER  VIII. 

Developments,  Thirteenth  Century. — Description  of  con- 
struction of  Church  of  Notre  Dame  at  Dijon  —  Explanation  by 
means  of  an  example  of  cast-iron,  stone  and  wood.  —  Thirteenth- 
century  Builders  did  not  put  caprice  in  the  place  of  reason. — 
Nineteenth-century  Architects  can  learn  much  by  studying  con- 
struction of  Notre  Dame  at  Dijon.  — Description  of  S.  Stephen 
at  Auxerre.  —  The  system  of  Champagne  and  of  Burgundy.  — 
Champagne  precedes  even  Ile-de-France,  in  developing  princi- 
ples of  Gothic  construction.  —  No  Gothic  monument  can  be 
built  leaving  something  for  future  ages  to  do.  —  The  principles 
of  an  art  must  be  used  in  judging  it ;  not  the  principles  of  other 
arts.  —  Facade  of  Cathedral  at  Paris  furnishes  fine  example  of 
mixed  construction.  —  Pyramid  is  a  heap  of  stones,  not  a 
construction.  —  Gothic  construction  requires  to  be  reasoned 
out.  —  Buttressing  of  interior  and  exterior  piers.  —  Principle 
of  equilibrium.  —  A  Gothic  building  co-operates  in  all  its 
parts  by  an  action  or  a  resistance.  —  Materials  used  by  archi- 
tects of  Picardy  can  be  set  against  the  cleavage.  —  Builders  and 
formulas;  Construction  of  the  Cathedral  of  Beauvais;  The 
Cathedral  of  Amiens;  The  two  compared.  —  The  use  of  cramp- 
irons  for  anchorage.  — Construction  of  the  Church  of  St.  Urbain 
of  Troyes.  —  The  reconciliation  between  purely  material  require- 


xii 


CONTENTS. 


ments  and  those  of  Art.  —  Architects  of  the  Middle  Ages  be- 
lieved that  equilibrium  was  the  true  law  of  construction.  —  They 
suppressed  the  horizontal  line,  keeping  it  only  to  indicate  the 
level  of  stories,  or  resting-places  within.  —  The  exterior  clearly 
showed  the  interior  arrangement.  —  In  Gothic  architecture  con- 
tingencies must  be  thought  of  in  advance;  nothing  can  be  left 
to  chance.  —  Construction  of  the  Church  of  St.  Nazaire  of  Car- 
cassonne    Page  175 


CHAPTER  IX. 

Civil  Construction.  —  A  Mediaeval  Dwelling.  —  Mediaeval  Archi- 
tects did  not  regard  the  laws  of  symmetry.  —  Household  needs 
were  crowded  in  country  as  well  as  in  town.  —  Two  distinct 
modes  of  building  at  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century.  —  Cellular 
construction  used  in  Civil  Buildings. — Great  attention  paid  to 
smallest  details  in  Mediaeval  Civil  Constructions.  —  Construction 
of  Abbey  S.  Marie  de  Breteuil.  —  Use  of  corbels;  nature  of 
materials  influenced  methods  of  construction.  —  The  picturesque 
in  building.  —  History  is  just,  but  has  to  be  waited  for  a  long 
time.  —  The  Mediaeval  Master- workman. — The  necessities  of 
Civil  Construction  more  varied  than  Ecclesiastical  Constructions. 

—  Corbels  played  an  important  role  in  Civil  Constructions.  —  A 
Mediaeval  corner  doorway. — The  great  hall  of  the  Chateau  of 
Coucy  Page  274 

CHAPTER  X. 

Military  Constructions.  —  Sapping  and  mining  principal  modes 
of  attack  in  twelfth  century.  —  Construction  of  a  tower  to 
render  futile  works  of  the  assailants.  —  Mortars  used  in  Ecclesi- 
astical Constructions  not  so  good  as  in  Civil  and  Military  Con- 
structions in  twelfth  and  thirteenth  centuries.  —  Superior  quality 
of  stones  used  in  fortifications.  —  Fortresses  built  by  requisition, 
Cathedrals  the  result  of  affection  and  a  desire  for  liberty. — 
Cathedrals  suffered  for  lack  of  money,  fortresses  built  by  powerful 
lords. —  Richard  Cceur-de-lion  ;  Enguerrand  III.  —  Fortress 
Endelis,  Chateau  Gaillard,  Chateau  Coucy. — Philip  the  Bold 
and  Philip  the  Fair.  —  Fortifications  in  the  city  of  Carcassonne. 

—  The  Tower  Du  Trtfsau. —  Modern  artillery  cut  short  refine- 
ments of  defence,  heretofore  effective  Page  333 


CONSTRUCTION. 


CHAPTER  I. 
General  View. 

CONSTRUCTION  is  a  science  ;  it  is  also  an  art  —  that  is  to  say, 
the  constructor  must  have  knowledge,  experience  and  a  natural 
gift.  Some  are  born  constructors.  Science  which  is  acquired,  can 
but  develop  the  germs  already  deposited  in  the  brain  of  those 
destined  to  give  useful  employment  and  permanent  form  to  rough 
materials. 

It  is  with  peoples  as  with  individuals  :  some  are  constructors  from 
the  cradle,  others  can  never  become  so ;  the  progress  of  civilization 
adds  but  little  to  this  natural  faculty. 

Architecture  and  Construction  must  be  taught,  or  practised  simul- 
taneously ;  Construction  is  the  means,  Architecture  is  the  result. 
Nevertheless,  there  are  works  of  architecture  which  cannot  be  con- 
sidered as  construction,  and  certain  constructions  which  can  scarcely 
be  ranked  among  architectural  works.  Some  animals  construct: 
these  cells,  those  nests,  others  mounds,  burrows,  hovels,  wicker- 
work —  e.  (j.,  woven  twigs.  This  is  certainly  construction,  but  it  is 
not  architecture. 

Architectural  construction  is  the  employment  of  materials  accord- 
ing to  their  quality  and  their  adaptability,  with  the  idea  of  satisfying 
a  want  by  the  most  simple  and  solid  means,  giving  to  the  constructed 
object  the  appearance  of  durability  and  proper  proportions,  subject 
to  certain  rules  imposed  by  the  senses  —  reason  and  human  instinct. 


2 


GENERAL  VIEW. 


The  methods  of  the  constructor  must  necessarily  vary  according 
to  the  nature  of  the  materials,  the  means  at  his  disposal,  the  require- 
ments which  he  must  satisfy,  and  the  civilization  in  the  midst  of 
which  he  is  placed. 

The  Greeks  and  the  Romans  were  constructors,  yet  these  two 
peoples  set  out  from  opposite  starting-points.  They  did  not  employ 
the  same  materials,  they  worked  them  by  different  means,  and  satis- 
fied wants  which  were  not  the  same. 

Accordingly,  Greek  monuments  differ  essentially  in  appearance 
from  Roman.  The  Greek  uses  only  the  lintel  in  his  constructions ; 
the  Roman  uses  the  arch,  and,  in  consequence,  the  vault :  this  alone 
proves  sufficiently  what  very  dissimilar  constructions  those  opposite 
principles  must  produce,  as  well  in  the  means  employed  as  in  their 
appearance. 

We  need  not  notice  here  the  origin  and  the  consequences  of  these 
two  principles;  we  take  Roman  architecture  at  the  point  it  had 
reached  in  the  latter  days  of  the  Empire,  for  that  is  the  only  source 
from  which  the  Middle  Ages  at  first  derived  their  ideas. 

The  principle  of  Roman  construction  is  this  :  To  establish  points 
of  support,  offering  by  their  position  and  their  perfect  cohesion 
masses  sufficiently  solid  and  homogeneous  to  resist  the  weight  and 
the  thrusts  of  the  vaults;  to  distribute  these  weights  and  the 
thrusts  upon  stable  piers,  the  inert  resistance  of  which  is  sufficient. 

Thus  the  Roman  construction  is  but  a  concrete  mass,  skilfully 
calculated,  by  which  all  the  parts  devoid  of  elasticity  hold  one 
another  by  the  laws  of  gravity  and  by  their  perfect  adherence. 

Among  the  Greeks,  stability  is  obtained  solely  by  the  judicious 
observance  of  the  laws  of  gravity.  They  do  not  seek  the  adherence 
of  the  materials ;  in  fact,  they  neither  know  nor  use  mortars.  In 
their  monuments  the  weight  acts  only  vertically  ;  they,  therefore, 
need  but  vertical  resistance.  Vaults  being  unknown  to  them,  they 
do  not  require  a  support  for  oblique  thrusts. 

How  did  the  Romans  proceed  to  obtain  passive  resistance  and 


CONSTRUCTION. 


3 


perfect  adherence  between  all  the  inert  and  active  parts  of  their 
constructions ;  that  is  to  say,  between  the  points  of  support  and  the 
vaults? 

They  built  up  homogeneous  masonry  by  means  of  small  materials 
such  as  pebbles  and  stones  united  by  good  mortar,  and  they  enclosed 
these  masses  in  an  encasing  of  brick,  of  rough  or  cut  stone.  As  to 
the  vaults,  they  were  formed  of  ribs  of  brickwork  or  stone  in  the 
body  of  the  vaults,  filled-in  with  beton  thrown  on  centres  of  wood. 

This  method  presented  many  advantages.  It  was  expeditious, 
and  edifices  upon  the  same  plan  could  be  constructed  in  any 
country  by  employing  the  armies  or  the  levies  to  erect  them ;  it  was 
durable,  economical,  and  only  required  good  direction,  with  a 
limited  number  of  able  and  intelligent  workmen,  under  whom  a  con- 
siderable number  of  simple  hodmen  could  work.  It  rendered  un- 
necessary the  slow  and  heavy  transport  of  cumbersome  materials 
and  of  the  machinery  wherewith  to  raise  them ;  it  was,  in  fact,  the 
consequence  of  the  social  and  political  state  of  Roman  society. 

The  Romans,  however,  built  edifices,  etc.,  after  the  same  manner 
as  the  Greeks,  such  as  their  temples,  their  basilicas;  but  these 
monuments  are  an  importation,  and  must  be  placed  outside  of  the 
true  Roman  construction. 

The  barbarians  who  invaded  the  Roman  provinces  did  not  bring 
with  them  any  arts  or  methods  of  construction,  or,  at  least,  the 
elements  which  they  introduced  in  the  midst  of  the  expiring  Roman 
civilization  could  have  had  but  a  very  feeble  influence.  They  found 
monuments  already  constructed,  and  they  made  use  of  them.  Long 
after  the  appearance  of  the  barbarians  upon  the  Gallo-Roman  soil, 
there  still  existed  a  large  number  of  ancient  edifices,  which  would 
indicate  that  the  Germanic  hordes  did  not  destroy  them  all.  In 
fact,  they  often  tried  to  repair  them,  and  soon  to  imitate  them. 

But,  after  such  long  disasters,  the  traditions  left  by  the  Roman 
constructors  must  in  a  great  measure  have  been  lost ;  and,  under 
the  Merovingians,  the  buildings  erected  in  Gaul  were  but  barbaric 


4 


GENERAL  VIEW. 


reproductions  of  the  ancient  constructions  either  spared  by  war,  or 
which  had  been  able  to  withstand  prolonged  neglect. 

The  few  remaining  monuments  antedating  the  Carlovingian 
period  present  constructions  in  which  but  a  slight  reflection 
of  the  art  of  the  Roman  is  discernible;  they  are  but  rough  imi- 
tations of  the  numerous  edifices,  the  ruins  of  which  still  covered 
the  soil. 

It  is  only  during  the  reign  of  Charlemagne  that  we  find  con- 
structors making  some  attempt  to  dispel  the  ignorance  in  which  the 
preceding  ages  had  been  plunged. 

The  continuous  relations  of  this  prince  with  the  East,  his  connec- 
tion with  the  Lombards,  with  whom  the  last  traditions  of  the 
ancient  art  seem  to  have  taken  refuge,  supplied  him  the  means  of 
drawing  to  him  and  into  the  countries  under  his  rule  builders  whom 
he  knew  how  to  utilize  with  remarkable  zeal  and  perseverance.  His 
aim  certainly  was  to  revive  the  Roman  arts,  but  the  sources  to 
which  he  had  to  apply  for  this  result  had  been  greatly  modified  in 
their  origin. 

Charlemagne  could  not  send  architects  to  study  the  monu- 
ments of  ancient  Rome,  for  he  had  none :  he  could  ask  for  artists, 
engineers  and  skilled  workmen  only  from  the  East,  Spain  or 
Lombardy,  the  countries  which  alone  possessed  any.  They 
brought  with  them  methods  that  had  already  deviated  from  those 
of  antiquity. 

The  Carlovingian  revival  produced,  therefore,  quite  different 
results  from  those  probably  expected  by  its  author.  After  all,  the 
object  was  attained,  as  the  new  elements  imported  into  the  West 
soon  produced  notable  efforts,  and  after  that  period  the  arts 
progressed  rapidly. 

It  is  the  history  of  this  advancement  in  relation  to  construction 
only  which  we  shall  try  to  describe,  referring  our  readers  to  the 
word  "Architecture"  for  all  which  appertains  to  the  development 
of  this  art  from  the  tenth  to  the  sixteenth  century. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


5 


During  the  existence  of  the  Roman  Empire,  whether  at  Rome  or 
in  Byzantium,  it  is  easy  to  recognize  that  vaults  were  the  dominant 
motive  of  the  constructors.  From  the  barrel-vault  they  quickly 
arrived  at  the  groined  or  intersecting  vault,  and  from  the  dome  sup- 
ported upon  a  circular  wall  or  drum  to  the  hemispherical  vault 
borne  upon  pendentives,  as  in  the  construction  of  the  Church  of 
Santa  Sophia;  this  being  an  immense  step  which  established  a  line 
of  demarcation  between  the  ancient  Roman  construction  and  that  of 
the  modern  age. 

Neither  Rome,  Italy  nor  Gaul  could  show  one  single  Roman 
edifice  in  which  the  hemispherical  vault  was  supported  by  pendentives. 
The  Church  of  Santa  Sophia  is  the  first1  to  supply  us  with  an 
example  of  that  kind  of  construction,  and,  as  every  one  knows,  it  is 
the  largest  dome  in  existence. 

How  could  the  Roman  architects  established  in  Byzantium 
manage  to  conceive  and  execute  a  construction  of  this  kind  ?  This 
we  will  not  try  to  unravel.  We  take  the  fact,  where,  for  the  first 
time,  it  shows  with  undoubted  grandeur  and  freedom. 

To  cover  a  circular  enclosure  with  a  hemispherical  vault  was  quite 
a  natural  idea,  and  was  adopted  in  remote  antiquity ;  to  introduce 
cylinders  or  barrel-vaults  in  the  circular  drum  was  but  a  natural 
consequence  of  the  first  step.  But  to  erect  a  hemispherical  dome 
upon  a  square  plan  —  that  is  to  say,  upon  four  isolated  piers  placed 
at  the  angles  of  a  square  —  was  not  a  deduction  from  the  first  prin- 
ciples; it  was  an  innovation,  and  one  of  the  boldest. 

The  builders  whom  Charlemagne  brought  from  Lombardy  and  the 
East,  to  the  West,  did  not,  however,  bring  with  them  this  mode  of 
construction ;  they  contented  themselves  with  erecting,  as  at  Aix- 
la-Chapelle,  vaults  with  octagonal  or  circular  bases  upon  drums  ris- 
ing from  the  foundation.  It  was  later  on  that  the  constructions 
derived  from  the  Byzantines  obtained  a  direct  influence  in  the 
West.  As  to  the  building  methods  of  the  Carlovingian  constructors, 
they  approached  the  Roman  methods,  which  consisted  in  massive 


p]  Note  to  be  added  at  end  of  Chapter. 


6 


GENERAL  VIEW. 


rubble-work  enclosed  in  facings  of  brick,  of  rough  or  dressed  stone, 
or  else  of  stone  alternating  with  courses  of  brick,  the  whole  bedded 
in  thick  joints  of  mortar,  as  shown  in  Figure  1. 


Fig.  1. 

We  indicate  at  A  courses  of  triangular  bricks,  presenting  their 
largest  side  to  the  face,  and  at  B  the  courses  of  stone,  more  or  less 
regular,  and  presenting  a  front,  for  the  most  part  square,  to  the 
faces. 

At  C  is  shown  a  brick  of  which  the  thickness  varies  from  0.04  c, 
to  0.05  c,  and  at  D  a  facing  stone. 

This  is  Roman  construction  roughly  executed.  But  the  Romans 
seldom  employed  this  method  unless  they  wanted  to  cover  the  fac- 
ings by  a  veneer  of  marble  or  of  stucco.  When  they  made  facings 
with  cut-stone,  they  laid  these  without  mortar  upon  their  natural 
beds,  leaving  them  a  wide  bed,  so  that  these  facings  might  really 
become  a  help,  capable  of  resisting  a  pressure  which  the  wall  alone 
could  not  have  supported. 

From  the  first  days  of  the  Carlovingian  period,  constructors  also 
wanted  to  erect  edihces  faced  with  cut-stone,  upon  the  style  of 
certain  Roman  buildings ;  but  they  did  not  possess  the  powerful 
means  employed  by  the  Romans.  They  could  neither  transport  nor 
much  less  raise  to  any  considerable  height  blocks  of  stone  of  a  large 
size.    They,  therefore,  contented  themselves  with  the  appearance 


CONSTRUCTION. 


7 


only ;  that  is,  they  made  facings  composed  of  a  veneering,  generally 
of  stone  set  on  edge  and  of  thin  scantling ;  carefully  avoiding  the 
settling,  and  filling  the  hollows  between  these  facings  with  rubble 
bedded  in  mortar. 

They  sometimes  went  so  far  as  to  try  to  imitate  the  construction 
of  Roman  work  by  placing  these  facings  of  stone  upon  dry  joints 
without  mortar.  It  is  needless  to  say  how  defective  this  construc- 
tion was,  the  more  so  that  their  mortar  was  poor,  their  lime  badly 
burned  or  badly  slaked,  their  sand  adulterated  with  earth,  and  their 
rubble  extremely  irregular. 

Sometimes   they  took  a  middle   course;  that  is,  they  erected 
facings  of  small  cutstones  held  together  by  thick  beds  of  mortar. 

These  efforts,  these  gropings,  did  not  constitute  an  art.  If,  in  the  * 
details  of  construction,  architects  gave  evidence  of  an  imperfect 
knowledge,  if  they  could  but  so  poorly  imitate  the  process  of  the 
Romans,  it  stands  to  reason  that,  in  the  variety  of  their  buildings, 
they  found  themselves  repeatedly  cornered  by  difficulties  which  they 
were  not  in  a  condition  to  surmount :  wanting  in  knowledge,  pos- 
sessing only  precedents  almost  obscure,  having  no  able  workmen  nor 
powerful  engines,  groping  their  way,  they  had  to  make,  and  did 
make,  tremendous  efforts  to  erect  small  buildings,  to  render  them 
solid  and,  above  all,  to  vault  them.  It  is  there  that,  in  the  Carlovin- 
gian  monuments,  one  can  always  recognize  the  incompetence  of  the 
constructors,  their  embarrassment,  their  uncertainty,  and  often 
the  discouragement  resulting  from  incapability.  From  this  very 
ignorance  of  ancient  methods,  and  especially  from  the  continued 
efforts  of  the  builders  from  the  ninth  to  the  eleventh  centuries, 
there  sprang  up  a  new  art  of  building :  the  result  of  unfortunate 
experiments  at  first,  but  which,  repeated  with  perseverance  and 
attended  with  uninterrupted  improvement,  marked  out  a  road  not 
already  explored.  No  less  than  three  centuries  were  needed  to 
instruct  these  barbarians ;  but  they  were  able,  nevertheless,  after 
such  slow  efforts,  to  congratulate  themselves  upon  having  opened  to 


8 


GENERAL  VIEW. 


future  constructors  a  new  era,  which  borrowed  but  little  from  the 
arts  of  antiquity. 

The  stern  necessities  by  which  these  first  constructors  found  them- 
selves confronted  compelled  them  to  fall  back  on  their  own  resources 
in  preference  to  the  studies  of  ancient  monuments,  which  they 
understood  but  very  imperfectly,  and  which  in  the  greater  part  of 
the  Gallic  provinces  existed  only  in  a  state  of  ruin.  Ever  ready  to 
imitate  foreign  works,  they  submitted  these  to  their  own  imperfect 
processes,  and  in  thus  transforming  them  they  made  them  contribute 
towards  a  unique  art,  in  which  reason  prevailed  over  tradition. 
That  was  a  hard  school :  resting  with  uncertainty  upon  the  past, 
finding  itself  confronted  by  the  needs  of  a  civilization  where  every- 
thing had  to  be  created,  possessing  but  the  elements  of  the  exact 
sciences,  it  had  no  guide  other  than  experiments;  but  this  method,  if 
not  the  quickest,  had,  at  least,  the  advantage  of  making  practical 
observers,  who  were  careful  to  collect  all  the  improvements  which 
could  help  them. 

In  the  edifices  of  the  eleventh  century  construction  already  makes 
sensible  progress,  which  is  but  the  consequence  of  errors  avoided 
with  more  or  less  skill ;  for  an  error  and  its  effects  instruct  men 
more  than  perfect  works. 

They  had  no  longer  at  their  command  the  means  employed  by 
the  Romans  in  their  undertakings  :  short  of  workmen,  of  money,  of 
means  of  transportation,  of  connections,  of  roads,  of  tools,  of  ap- 
pliances, confined  in  provinces,  separated  by  the  feudal  administra- 
tion, the  constructors  could  only  count  upon  very  feeble  resources; 
and  meanwhile,  at  this  time  [the  eleventh  century],  they  were 
already  called  upon  to  erect  vast  monasteries,  palaces,  churches  and 
fortifications. 

It  was  necessary  that  their  industry  should  supply  all  that  Roman 
genius  had  known  how  to  organize,  all  that  the  state  of  our  modern 
civilization  furnishes  us  in  profusion. 

It  was  urgent  to  obtain  great  results  at  little  expense  [for  then 


CONSTRUCTION. 


9 


the  West  was  poor],  and  to  gratify  numerous  and  pressing  needs 
upon  a  soil  ravaged  by  barbarism. 

It  was  incumbent  upon  the  constructor  to  procure  the  materials, 
to  find  the  means  of  transporting  them,  and  to  fight  against  the 
ignorance  of  unskilful  laborers,  and  that  he  himself  should  make  his 
own  observations  as  to  the  quality  of  the  lime,  of  the  sand,  of  the 
stone,  and  to  look  after  the  storing  of  the  lumber.  He  not  only 
had  to  be  the  architect,  but  the  quarrier,  the  surveyor,  the  modeller, 
the  superintendent,  the  carpenter,  the  lime-burner,  the  mason,  and 
could  be  assisted  only  by  his  own  intelligence  and  reason  as  an 
observer. 

To-day,  when  a  lawyer  or  a  business  man  has  a  house  built  with- 
out the  assistance  of  an  architect,  it  is  easy  for  us  to  consider  these 
first  efforts  as  rude ;  but  the  genius  which  a  builder  of  that  period 
required  and  evinced  in  the  erection  of  a  hall  or  a  church  was 
certainly  superior  to  that  demanded  from  an  architect  of  our  time, 
whose  operations  may  be  carried  on  without  any  knowledge  of  i  lie 
first  elements  of  his  art,  a  thing  which  too  often  occurs. 

In  those  days  of  barbaric  ignorance,  the  most  intelligent,  those 
who  had  raised  themselves  by  their  own  genius  above  the  common 
workman,  were  alone  capable  of  directing  a  structure,  and  the 
superintendence  of  buildings,  necessarily  limited  among  a  restricted 
number  of  superior  men,  for  that  reason  produced  original  works,  in 
the  execution  of  which  the  reasoning  faculties  were  largely  called 
upon,  where  calculation  is  apparent,  and  the  form  bears  that  stamp 
of  superiority  which  is  the  distinguishing  mark  of  buildings  ably 
planned,  subservient  to  the  needs  and  customs  of  a  people. 

It  must  clearly  be  recognized,  if  even  we  were  to  be  designated  as 
barbarians  ourselves,  that  the  beauty  of  a  structure  does  not  lie  in 
the  improvements  wrought  by  an  advanced  civilization,  or  a  state  of 
highly  developed  industry,  but  in  the  judicious  employment  of  the 
materials  and  the  means  placed  at  the  disposal  of  the  constructor. 
AVith  our  numerous  materials,  with  the  metals  delivered  to  us  from 


10 


GENERAL  VIEW. 


our  workshops,  with  the  multitude  of  skilled  workmen  in  our  cities, 
it  sometimes  happens  that  we  erect  a  structure  defective,  absurd, 
ridiculous  and  without  reason  or  economy ;  whereas  with  ashlar  and 
wood,  a  good,  handsome  and  sensible  structure  can  be  made. 

So  far  as  we  know  the  variety  or  the  perfection  of  the  material 
employed  has  never  proved  the  merit  of  him  who  has  used  it ;  and 
excellent  materials  are  detestable  if  used  in  disregard  of  their  proper 
place  and  function,  by  a  man  devoid  of  knowledge  and  of  sense. 

What  one  may  be  justly  proud  of  is  the  good  and  proper  employ- 
ment of  the  materials,  and  not.  their  quantity  or  quality. 

The  foregoing  written  under  the  form  of  a  parenthesis,  is  to  im- 
press upon  our  readers  that  we  should  not  despise  the  constructors, 
who  had  at  their  disposal  only  stone  badly  quarried,  bad  stone  from 
the  site,  badly  burned  lime,  imperfect  tools  and  weak  implements ; 
for  with  such  coarse  appliances,  these  constructors  teach  us  excellent 
principles,  applicable  at  all  times. 

And  the  proof  is  what  they  did,  that  is,  they  formed  a  school 
which  from  the  point  of  view  of  practical  as  well  as  theoretical 
science,  and  of  the  judicious  employment  of  materials,  arrived  at  a 
degree  of  perfection  unsurpassed  in  modern  times.  Let  those  who 
teach  architecture  without  having  practised  the  art,  judge  the  archi- 
tectural productions  of  ancient  and  modern  civilization  by  mere 
appearance,  by  superficial  form  which  impresses  them ;  but  we  who 
are  called  to  construct  must  seek  our  instruction  through  the 
attempts  and  the  progress  of  these  ingenious  architects,  who  having 
nothing  to  draw  from  were  compelled  to  solve  the  problems  which 
were  imposed  by  contemporary  society. 

To  consider  the  builders  of  the  Middle  Ages  as  barbarians, 
because  they  gave  up  building  by  Roman  methods,  is  to  be  unwil- 
ling to  take  account  of  the  state  of  the  new  society,  —  is  to 
despise  the  profound  modifications  introduced  into  their  customs  by 
Christianity,  founded  upon  the  genius  of  the  Western  nations :  it  is 
to  efface  several  centuries  of  slow  but  persevering  toil,  which  was 


CONSTRUCTION. 


11 


taking  place  in  the  bosom  of  society ;  toil  which  has  developed  the 
most  active  and  the  most  vital  elements  of  modern  civilization. 

No  one  admires  antiquity  more  than  we  do,  no  one  is  more  inclined 
than  we  to  recognize  the  superiority  over  the  modern  arts  of  the 
noble  art  epochs  of  the  Greeks  and  Romans ;  but  we  are  born  in 
the  nineteenth  century,  and  we  cannot  ignore  the  fact  that  between 
antiquity  and  our  own  times  there  has  been  a  great  birth  of  ideas,  of 
needs,  of  means  unknown  to  the  ancients. 

We  must  take  account  of  the  new  elements,  of  the  tendencies  of  a 
new  society.  Let  us  regret  the  disappearance  of  the  social  organi- 
zation of  antiquity,  let  us  study  it  scrupulously,  let  us  have  recourse 
to  it ;  but  let  us  not  forget  that  we  live  under  neither  Pericles  nor 
Augustus  ;  that  we  have  no  slaves  ;  that  three  fourths  of  Europe  are 
no  longer  plunged  in  ignorance  and  barbarism  to  the  great  advan- 
tage of  the  other  fourth ;  that  society  is  no  longer  divided  into  two 
unequal  portions,  the  stronger  absolutely  controlled  by  the  other; 
that  our  needs  are  limitless ;  that  the  machinery  is  complicated  ;  that 
industry  analyzes  incessantly  all  the  means  placed  at  the  dis- 
posal of  mankind  and  transforms  them  ;  that  tradition  and  formulas 
are  replaced  by  reasoning,  and  that,  in  short,  art  in  order  to  exist, 
must  recognize  the  environment  amid  which  it  is  developing.  Now, 
in  the  Middle  Ages,  the  construction  of  buildings  had  entered  upog 
this  entirely  new  path. 

Lament  it,  if  you  will;  but  the  fact  does  not  the  less  exist,  and  we 
cannot  hinder  yesterday  from  being  the  eve  of  to-day.  What  is 
better,  then,  it  seems  to  us,  is  to  seek  in  the  labor  of  yesterday  what 
is  useful  to  us  to-day,  and  to  see  whether  this  labor  has  not  led  to 
the  work  of  the  present.    This  is  more  rational  than  to  despise  it. 

It  has  often  been  maintained  that  the  Middle  Ages  is  an  excep 
tional  epoch,  having  nothing  in  common  with  that  which  preceded 
it  nor  with  that  which  followed,  foreign  to  the  spirit  of  our  country 
and  to  modern  civilization.  That  is  perhaps  tenable  from  the  politi- 
cal point  of  view,  although  such  a  state  of  affairs  is  unique  in  the 


12 


GENERAL  VIEW. 


history  of  the  world,  where  everything  is  part  of  a  series;  but 
the  party  spirit  entering,  there  is  no  paradox  which  does  not  find 
supporters. 

In  architecture,  and  above  all,  in  construction,  there  is  not  possi- 
bly room  for  party  spirit,  and  we  do  not  see  that  the  principles  of 
civil  liberty,  that  modern  laws,  under  the  regime  of  which  we  have 
the  good  fortune  to  be  born,  are  in  any  way  attacked,  though  it  may 
be  shown  that  the .  builders  of  the  twelfth  century  knew  how  to 
construct  well,  that  those  of  the  thirteenth  century  were  very 
ingenious  and  free  in  the  employment  of  means ;  that  they  sought  the 
most  simple  and  least  expensive  processes  to  carry  out  the  pro- 
gramme which  had  been  imposed  upon  them  ;  that  they  reasoned 
correctly  and  knew  the  laws  of  statics  and  the  equilibrium  of  forces. 

A  custom  may  be  odious  and  oppressive  :  abbots  and  feudal  lords 
might,  if  you  please,  be  dissipated,  exercising  an  intolerable  despot- 
ism, yet  the  monasteries  or  the  castles  in  which  they  dwelt,  might, 
nevertheless,  be  built  with  wisdom,  economy  and  wide  range  in  the 
employment  of  materials. 

A  building  is  not  fanatical,  oppressive,  tyrannical — these  epithets 
have  not  yet  been  applied  to  a  mass  of  stone,  wood  or  iron.  A 
structure  is  good  or  bad,  appropriate  or  devoid  of  reason.  If  we 
find  nothing  to  take  from  the  feudal  code,  that  does  not  imply 
we  have  nothing  to  learn  from  the  constructions  of  that  time. 

A  parliament  condemns  unhappy  Jews  and  sorcerers  to  be  burned 
alive,  but  the  hall  in  which  that  parliament  sits  may  be  a  structure 
that  is  more  appropriate  and  better  built  than  that  in  which  our 
magistrates  apply  wise  laws  with  an  enlightened  spirit. 

A  man  of  letters,  an  historian,  says,  in  speaking  of  a  feudal  castle  : 
"  This  retreat  of  brigands,  this  dwelling  of  petty  despots,  tyrannizing 
over  their  vassals,  warring  with  their  neighbors  ..."  Immedi- 
ately every  one  cries  out  against  lord  and  castle.  In  what  are  these 
edifices  the  accomplices  of  those  who  had  them  built,  above  all, 
if  the  masons  and  laborers  suffered  the  employers'  tyranny  ?  Did 


CONSTRUCTION. 


13 


not  the  Greeks  show  on  many  occasions  the  most  odious  fanaticism? 
Does  that  prevent  our  admiring  the  Parthenon  or  the  Temple  of 
Theseus  ? 

It  is  high  time,  so  we  think,  that  we  architects  should  no  longer 
allow  ourselves  to  be  deceived  by  the  talk  of  those  who,  strangers  to 
the  practice  of  our  art,  judge  of  works  which  they  cannot  under- 
stand, of  which  they  appreciate  neither  the  plan,  construction  nor 
utility,  and  who,  moved  by  their  feelings  or  their  personal  tastes,  by 
secluded  studies  and  a  narrow  spirit  of  party,  hurl  anathemas  upon 
artists  whose  efforts,  science,  and  practical  experience,  are  to  us, 
even  to-day,  of  great  assistance.  Little  does  it  matter  to  us  that  the 
feudal  lords  were  tyrants,  that  the  clergy  of  the  Middle  Ages  were 
corrupt,  ambitious  and  fanatical,  if  the  men  who  built  their  dwellings 
were  ingenious,  if  they  loved  their  art  and  practised  it  with  knowl- 
edge and  care.  Little  does  it  matter  to  us  that  a  prison  has  shut  in 
living  beings  for  years,  if  the  stones  of  that  prison  were  well  enough 
laid  to  offer  an  unsurmountable  obstacle ;  little  does  it  matter  to  us 
that  a  grille  has  closed  a  chamber  of  torture,  if  the  grille  be  well 
designed  and  the  iron  well  forged. 

The  confusion  between  the  institutions  and  the  products  of  the 
arts  ought  to  have  no  existence  for  us,  who  seek  our  advantage 
wherever  we  may  find  it.  Let  us  not,  to  our  own  detriment,  be  the 
dupes  of  exclusive  doctrines :  we  may  blame  the  customs  of  past  times 
if  they  seem  bad;  but  not  proscribe  their  arts  before  discovering 
whether  we  have  not  any  advantages  to  derive  from  the  study  of  them. 

Let  us  leave  to  enlightened  amateurs  the  task  of- disputing  about 
the  preeminence  of  Greek  architecture  over  Roman  architecture, 
of  the  latter  over  the  architecture  of  the  Middle  Ages;  let  us  leave 
to  them  the  discussion  of  these  unanswerable  questions ;  let  us,  if 
we  have  nothing  better  to  do,  listen  to  their  discoursing  of  our  art 
without  knowing  how  a  panel  is  drawn  or  a  stone  cut  or  placed  — it 
is  not  allowable  to  practise  medicine  or  even  pharmacy  without  being 
a  physician  or  apothecary  ;  but  architecture!  that  is  another  thing. 


14 


GENERAL  VIEW. 


To  understand  the  first  efforts  of  the  builders  of  the  Middle  Ages, 
it  is  necessary  first  to  know  the  principles  which  they  laid  down,  and 
the  practical  means  then  in  use. 

The  Romans,  masters  of  the  world,  having  known  how  to  estab- 
lish a  regular,  uniform  government  in  the  midst  of  so  many  allied 
and  conquered  peoples,  had  in  their  hands  resources  which  were 
absolutely  lacking  in  the  provinces  of  the  Gauls,  divided  into  little 
States  and  innumerable  parts,  by  the  establishment  of  the  feudal 
system. 

The  Romans,  whenever  they  wished  to  cover  a  country  with  mon- 
uments of  public  utility,  could  throw  upon  that  point  at  a  given 
moment,  not  only  an  army  of  soldiers  used  to  the  work,  but  would 
impress  the  inhabitants  (for  the  system  of  requisition  was  practised 
on  a  vast  scale  by  the  Romans),  and  obtain,  by  the  aid  of  that  mul- 
titude of  hands,  prodigious  results.  They  adopted,  in  order  to  con- 
struct promptly  and  well,  methods  which  accorded  perfectly  with 
the  social  state. 

Had  the  builders  of  the  Middle  Ages  wished  to  employ  these 
methods,  where  would  they  have  found  this  army  of  workmen  ? 

How  obtain  in  a  country  without  stone,  for  instance,  the  materials 
necessary  for  building,  when  the  old  Roman  roads  were  destroyed ; 
when  money  was  lacking  to  buy  materials  and  obtain  beasts  of  bur- 
den ;  when  the  provinces  were  almost  always  at  war  with  one 
another ;  when  each  abbot,  each  lord,  regarded  himself  as  an  abso- 
lute sovereign,  so  much  the  more  jealous  of  his  power  in  proportion 
as  the  country  over  which  it  extended  was  small  ? 

How  organize  regular  levies  of  men  where  many  powers  quarrelled 
for  preeminence,  where  the  inhabitants  were  scarcely  numerous 
enough  to  cultivate  the  soil,  and  where  war  was  the  normal  con- 
dition ? 

How  get  together  the  enormous  mass  of.  materials  necessary  for 
the  least  extensive  construction?  How  feed  the  workmen  at  one 
place  ?    The  religious  orders  were  the  first  who  could  by  themselves 


CONSTRUCTION. 


15 


undertake  important  building  :  First,  because  they  could  assemble 
at  one  place  a  number  of  workmen  sufficiently  united  by  a  single 
thought,  subject  to  discipline,  freed  from  military  service,  possessors 
of  the  land  on  which  they  lived;  secondly,  because  they  amassed 
property  which  grew  rapidly  under  a  regular  administration  ;  because 
they  joined  in  amicable  intercourse  with  neighboring  establishments 
because  they  ploughed  up  and  rendered  wholesome  uncultivated 
lands,  laid  out  roads,  acquired  by  gift  or  purchase  the  richest  quarries, 
the  best  woods,  built  workshops,  offered  to  the  peasants  guarantees 
relatively  certain,  and  peopled  their  lands  thus  rapidly  to  the  detri- 
ment of  those  of  the  lay  nobility  ;  thirdly,  because  they  were  able,, 
thanks  to  their  privileges,  and  the  comparative  stability  of  their 
institutions,  to  form  with  their  monasteries  schools  of  artisans,] 
subject  to  a  regular  apprenticeship,  clothed,  fed,  maintained,  working 
under  the  same  direction,  preserving  traditions  and  recording 
improvements;  fourthly,  because  they  alone,  at  that  time,  extended 
their  influence  to  a  distance,  in  founding  establishments  subject  to 
the  mother  abbey  ;  because  thus  they  continued  to  profit  by  all  the 
partial  efforts  that  were  made  in  countries  very  diverse  in  climate, 
manners  and  customs.  It  is  to  the  activity  of  the  religious  orders 
that  the  art  of  construction  owes  its  rise  from  barbarism  in  the 
eleventh  century. 

The  Order  of  Cluny,  as  the  most  important  (see  "Architecture 
Monastique''),  the  most  powerful  and  the  most  enlightened,  was  the 
first  which  had  a  school  of  architects  whose  new  principles  were  to 
produce  in  the  twelfth  century  monuments  freed  from  the  last  Roman 
traditions.  What  are  these  principles?  How  did  they  develop? 
This  we  must  examine. 

Note  p.  5.  1  In  the  actual  width  of  the  dome,  S.  Sophia  (104  feet)  is  not  the 
largest.   The  Pantheon  is  142  feet,  6  inches. 


CHAPTER  IT. 


Principles. 

IN  order  that  new  principles  may  develop,  it  is  necessary  in  every 
case  that  new  conditions  and  needs  show  themselves.  When  the 
Order  of  St.  Benedict  was  reformed  in  the  eleventh  century,  the  re- 
formers aimed  at  nothing  less  than  an  entire  change  in  a  society 
which,  scarcely  born,  was  already  falling  into  decay.  These  reform- 
ers, being  able  men,  commenced  by  abandoning  the  rotten  traditions 
of  ancient  society;  they  set  out  with  nothing,  desiring  to  continue 
no  longer  those  dwellings  which,  being  at  the  same  time  sumptuous 
and  barbaric,  had  until  then  served  as  refuges  for  the  corrupt  monks 
of  preceding  centuries. 

They  built  themselves  wooden  cabins,  lived  in  the  midst  of  the 
country,  taking  life  as  men  would  when  left  solely  to  their  industry  in 
a  desert.  These  first  steps  were  a  persistent  influence,  even  when  the 
increasing  riches  of  the  monasteries  and  their  importance  in 
the  midst  of  the  society  brought  them  to  change  their  huts  for  dwell- 
ings of  a  durable  nature,  luxuriously  built.  To  satisfy  the  absolute 
need  is  always  the  first  law  observed,  not  only  in  the  planning  of 
the  buildings  but  in  the  details  of  the  construction  ;  never  to  sacri- 
fice solidity  to  a  vain  appearance  of  richness  is  the  second. 

Stone  and  wood  are  always  stone  and  wood,  and  whether  we  use 
these  materials  in  a  structure  in  greater  or  less  quantity  their  func- 
tion is  the  same  among  all  peoples  and  in  all  times. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


17 


However  rich  and  powerful  the  monks  might  be  they  could  not 
hope  to  build  as  the  Romans  had  done.  They  endeavored  then  to 
raise  solid  and  durable  structures,  with  economy  (for  they  intended 
building  for  the  future). 

To  use  the  most  ordinary  Roman  method,  that  is  to  say,  in  making 
their  structures  of  masses  of  rubble,  enclosed  between  facings  of 
brick  or  ashlar,  demanded  more  laborers  than  they  had  at  their  dis- 
posal To  construct  by  means  of  enormous  blocks  of  hewn  stone, 
carefully  cut  and  placed,  required  means  of  transportation  far  be- 
yond their  facilities,  lacking  as  they  did  firm  roads,  a  considerable 
number  of  skilled  workmen,  many  beasts  of  burden,  costly  tools  or 
machinery  difficult  to  obtain. 

They  pursued  a  middle  course.  They  raised  the  principal  points  of 
support,  employing  for  the  dressings  cut  stone,  as  a  casing,  and  filled-in 


Fig.  2. 


with  rubble ;  for  filled  walls,  they  adopted  a  thin  facing  of  scappled 
ashlar,  or  else  stone  blocks  enclosing  a  mixture  of  pebbles  and  mortar. 

Figure  2  gives  an  idea  of  this  kind  of  construction.  In  order 
to  bind  together  the  different  parts  of  the  buildings,  to  bond  the 


L8 


PRINCIPLES. 


walls  in  their  length,  they  sunk  in  the  masonry  at  different  heights, 
under  the  supports  of  the  windows,  beneath  the  cornices,  longi- 
tudinal beams   of  wood,  as  we  have  represented   in  A.  (See 

"Chainage") 

In  these  constructions  the  stone  is  economized  as  much  as  possi- 
ble ;  no  piece  shows  any  gaps ;  all  are  set  in  the  most  economical 
manner ;  the  faces  are  but  just  sufficient  and  yet  are  executed  with 
the  greatest  care ;  not  only  are  the  facings  tooled,  but  also  the  beds 
and  the  joints,  and  these  stones  are  set  on  the  earth  without  mortar, 
after  the  Roman  arrangement. 

This  kind  of  building  is  shown  in  the  great  monastic  structures  of 
Cluny,  of  Vezelay,  and  of  La  Charite-sur-Loire  (eleventh  and  twelfth 
centuries). 

The  materials  employed  by  the  monks  are  those  which  they  could 
procure  for  themselves  in  the  vicinity,  in  the  quarries  which  they 
owned.  They  employed  them  in  so  far  as  their  good  qualities  and 
their  defects  would  allow.  If  these  materials  showed  faults,  if  the 
stone  was  split  by  the  frost,  the  monks  not  being  able  to  obtain 
other,  except  at  great  expense,  took  pains  to  put  it  in  the  best  con- 
dition, and,  in  order  to  protect  these  materials  from  injury  by  damp- 
ness and  the  effects  of  frost,  they  sought  to  withdraw  them  from 
atmospheric  agencies,  by  covering  them  with  projecting  roofs,  and 
by  keeping  them  from  the  ground  outside,  by  courses  of  stone,  which 
they  purchased  from  more  distant  quarries. 

There  is  always  in  the  works  of  men  who  only  rely  on  their  own 
resources,  and  their  own  forces  for  action,  a  certain  amount  of 
intelligence  and  energy,  of  great  value  in  the  eyes  of  those  who  can 
see;  even  though  the  work  is  imperfect,  and  otherwise  rough,  it 
contains  intelligence  arid  energy  not  found  in  the  works  produced 
by  men  more  civilized,  but  to  whom  industry  furnished  many  ele- 
ments, and  who  have  no  efforts  to  make  to  satisfy  all  their  needs. 
The  primitive  seekers,  then,  often  became  masters,  and  their  efforts 
a  costly  education,  for  more  intelligence  was  obviously  necessary  to 


CONSTRUCTION. 


19 


produce  at  that  period,  when  all  resources  were  lacking,  than  in  our 
own,  when  they  are  within  the  reach 'of  the  most  ordinary  minds. 

The  Roman  buildings,  by  reason  of  the  absolute  stability  of  their 
points  of  support  and  the  perfect  concretion  of  all  the  upper  parts 
(a  result  obtained,  as  we  have  already  said,  by  the  means  of  immense 
resources),  presented  immovable,  passive  masses,  as  if  they  had 
been  monuments  cut  from  a  single  block  of  tufa.  The  Romanesque 
architects,  not  having  at  their  disposal  such  powerful  means,  soon 
recognized  that  their  buildings  did  not  present  a  united  and  con- 
crete whole,  a  perfectly  stable  agglomeration ;  that  the  piers, 
formed  by  a  veneering  of  stone,  enclosing  a  mass  of  rough  stones 
put  together  often  with  mediocre  mortar,  that  the  walls  not  bonded 
in  all  their  height,  suffered  from  unequal  settling  which  caused  rup- 
tures in  the  buildings  and  in  consequence  serious  accidents. 

It  was  necessary  then  to  seek  for  proper  means  of  overcoming 
these  effects.  Beginning  with  the  eleventh  century,  the  Romanesque 
architects  wished,  for  reasons  elsewhere  set  forth  (See  "Architect- 
ure"), to  vault  most  of  their  great  edifices.  They  had  inherited  the 
Roman  vaults,  but  they  were  debarred  from  the  powerful  means 
which  the  Romans  adopted  for  supporting  them.  Their  intelligence 
had  to  make  up  for  this  lack  of  power.  The  Roman  vault  can  only 
sustain  itself  by  having  the  points  of  support  perfectly  stable,  for 
this  vault,  whether  cradle,  groin  or  half-spherical,  forms  a  homoge- 
neous crust  without  elasticity,  which  breaks  to  pieces  if  crevices 
occur  unexpectedly  in  its  curve. 

Wishing  to  make  vaults  like  those  of  the  Romans,  and  being  un- 
able to  give  them  perfectly  stable  supports,  it  was  necessary  for  the 
Romanesque  builders  to  find  a  new  method  of  holding  them  firmly, 
with  reference  to  the  unstability  of  the  supports  destined  to  carry 
and  buttress  them.  The  task  was  not  easy  to  fulfil ;  moreover,  the 
experiments,  the  endeavors,  the  attempts  had  been  numerous ;  but 
nevertheless,  from  the  beginning  of  these  attempts,  we  see  arising  a 
new  system  of  building,  and  this  system  is  founded  on  the  principle 


ft 

20  PRINCIPLES. 

of  elasticity,  replacing  the  principle  of  absolute  stability  adopted  by 
the  Romans.  The  Roman  vauh;,  save  for  rare  exceptions,  is  built  of 
rough  stone  concrete ;  if  it  is  strengthened  by  arches  of  brick,  these 
arches  are  buried  in  the  thickness  of  the  concrete,  and  become  one 
with  it.  The  Romanesque  builders,  instead  of  building  the  vault  of 
concrete,  constructed  it  of  unhewn  stones,  sunk  in  mortar,  but  set 
like  arch-stones,  or  of  stones  hewn  and  forming  a  small  facing  of 
masonry;  and  even  these  vaults  showed  a  certain  elasticity,  if  a 
movement  was  felt  in  the  supports,  in  consequence  of  the  joining  of 
the  arch-stone,  and  did  not  break  like  a  homogeneous  crust,  but 
followed  the  movement  of  the  piers.  Yet  this  first  modification  did 
not  entirely  reassure  the  Romanesque  builders ;  they  fixed  under 
these  vaults,  from  point  to  point,  at  the  height  of  the  supports  of 
greatest  resistance,  transverse  arches  faced  in  stone,  under  the 
soffits  of  the  vaults.  These  transverse  arches,  a  species  of  perma- 
nent centre,  elastic,  like  every  arch  composed  of  a  certain  quantity 
of  arch-stones,  followed  the  movement  of  the  piers,  yielded  to  their 
settling  down,  and  separating  and  supported  thus,  as  a  wooden 
centre  would  have  done,  the  vaults  of  masonry  built  over  them. 

The  Romanesque  builders  had  taken  from  the  Romans  the  groined 
vault,  built  on  a  square  base  and  formed  by  the  intersection  of  two 
half-cylinders  of  equal  diameter.  But  when  they  wished  to  raise 
vaults  upon  piers,  placed  at  the  angles  of  parallelograms,  the  Roman 
groined  vault  could  not  be  used ;  they  adopted,  in  this  case,  the 
cradle-vault,  or  half-cylinder  continued  without  intersection,  and  at 
the  height  of  the  piers,  they  reinforced  these  cradle-vaults  by  trans- 
verse arches  of  dimension  stones,  upon  which  they  relied  to  avoid  the 
injurious  effects  of  a  longitudinal  rupture  in  these  cradle-vaults,  in 
consequence  of  a  movement  in  the  piers.  Once  again,  and  we  insist 
upon  this  point,  it  was  a  permanent  centering.  Nevertheless, 
the  obstacles  and  the  difficulties  seemed  to  arise  in  proportion  as  the 
builders  believed  that  they  had  found  the  solution  of  the  problem. 
The  effects  of  the  thrust  of  vaults,  so  perfectly  recognized  by  the 


CONSTRUCTION. 


21 


Romans,  were  almost  unknown  to  the  Romanesque  builders.  The 
first  among  them  who  had  the  idea  of  fastening  a  semicircular  cradle- 
vault  upon  two  parallel  walls,  thought  that  he  had  certainly  avoided 
forever  the  disadvantages  attached  to  visible  timbers,  and  that  he 
had  combined  a  structure  at  the  same  time  solid,  durable  and  of 
monumental  aspect.  His  illusion  was  destined  to  be  of  no  long  dura- 
tion, for,  the  centres  and  planks  being  removed,  the  walls  leaned 
outwards  and  the  vault  fell  between  them.  It  was  necessary  then  to 
find  suitable  means  of  preventing  such  catastrophes. 

At  first  they  reinforced  the  walls  by  exterior  buttresses  and  by 
piers  erected  in  the  interior :  then,  at  the  height  of  these  buttresses 
and  piers,  they  fixed  transverse  arches  beneath  the  cradle-vaults. 
By  imbedding  timbers  lengthwise,  in  the  thickness  of  the  walls, 
from  pier  to  pier  at  the  springing  of  the  cradle-vaults,  they  thought 
it  possible  to  check  their  thrust  between  the  piers.  It  was  never 
more  than  a  temporary  remedy ;  if  some  buildings  thus  vaulted, 
resisted  the  thrust  of  the  cradle-vaults,  a  large  number  fell  to  pieces 
some  time  after  their  construction. 

But  it  is  necessary  that  our  readers  have  an  exact  idea  of  this  kind 
of  construction.  We  give  (Fig.  3)  the  whole  and  the  details.  In  A 
we  have  the  interior  piers  carrying  the  transverse  arches  E\  in  B,  the 
exterior  buttresses  destined  to  resist  their  thrust;  in  C,  the  beams  of 
wood  holding  the  cradle-vault  D,  at  its  springing.  In  order  to  reduce 
the  spreading  of  the  transverse  arches  as  much  as  possible,  the  con- 
structors allowed  a  considerable  projection  of  the  capitals  G. 

If  the  vaults  thus  planned  were  fixed  upon  piers  solidly  enough 
built  in  materials  well  joined  or  very  heavy,  if  the  walls  were  thick 
and  massive  from  top  to  bottom,  if  the  buttresses  jutted  out  suffi- 
ciently, and  if  the  transverse  arches  and  consequently  the  piers  were 
not  too  far  apart,  these  cradle  vaults,  reinforced  by  secondary  arc  hes, 
mi^ht  be  maintained. 

o 

But,  if,  as  happened  in  naves  bordered  with  aisles,  the  walls  rested 
upon  the  archivolts  and  the  detached  piers;  if  these  detached  piers 


22 


PRINCIPLES. 


which  they  tried  always  to  make  as  slender  as  possible  in  order 
not  to  obstruct  free  movement  and  the  view,  did  not  present  a 
surface  sufficient  to  receive  the  exterior  buttresses  rising  above  the 
vaults  at  the  lower  sides,  then  the  upper  cradle-vault,  in  spite  of  its 
transverse  arches,  or  with  its  transverse  arches,  little  by  little  bent 


Fig.  3. 


the  walls  and  the  piers  outward,  and  the  whole  structure  fell  apart. 
As  early  as  the  end  of  the  eleventh  century,  many  churches  and  halls 
thus  vaulted,  built  half  a  century  before,  fell  in  ruins,  and  it  was 
necessary  to  reconstruct  them.  These  accidents  were  a  lesson  to  the 
builders ;  they  gave  them  a  chance  to  observe  certain  phenomena  in 


CONSTRUCTION.  23 

statics  of  which  they  had  not  had  any  idea;  it  made  them  recognize 
that  these  beams  of  wood  sunk  in  the  masonry  and  deprived  of  air, 
speedily  became  rotten,  and  that  the  void  they  left  could  only  hasten 
the  destruction  of  the  buildings ;  that  the  walls  having  begun  to 
bend,  the  pressure  of  the  vaults  increased  in  direct  ratio  with  their 
separation  ;  that  in  short,  if  the  cradle-vaults  were  built  over  naves 
with  aisles,  the  disorders  caused  by  the  spreading  of  the  high  vaults 
were  such  that  it  was  impossible  to  maintain  the  piers  and  the  walls 
in  a  vertical  position. 

Nevertheless  the  moment  had  not  yet  come  when  the  builders 
were  to  solve  exactly  the  problem  of  the  stability  of  vaults  raised 
upon  parallel  walls ;  they  had  still  to  make  attempts  to  avoid  the 
effects  of  the  pressure  upon  the  lateral  walls.  The  Romanesque 
builders  knew  that  the  groined  vaults  presented  the  advantage  of 
exercising  pressure  and  thrust  only  upon  the  four  supports  receiving 
their  skewbacks.  Recognizing  that  the  cradle-vaults  exerted  on  the 
tops  of  the  walls  a  continual  pressure,  they  sought  to  do  away  with 
them,  and  to  replace  them  by  groined  vaults,  even  in  the  naves  com- 
posed of  oblong  compartments,  in  order  to  bring  all  their  weight  and 
their  pressure  to  bear  upon  the  piers  that  they  hoped  to  render 
stable.  But,  as  we  have  said  above,  the  Roman  groined  vault  can 
be  built  only  over  a  square  space ;  it  was  necessary  then,  to  find  a 
new  combination  of  groined  vaults  adapted  to  the  form  of  a  parallelo- 
gram. 

It  was  not  practicable  to  lay  out  these  vaults  geometrically,  and  it 
was  only  by  experiment  that  they  succeeded  in  constructing  them. 

Already,  during  the  eleventh  century,  the  builders  had  constructed 
vaults  which  partook  of  both  the  dome  and  the  groined  vault,  in  that 
these  vaults,  instead  of  being  formed  by  the  intersection  of  two 
cylinders  at  right  angles  are  produced  by  four  semicircular  arches 
joining  the  four  piers,  and  two  diagonal  arches  which  are  themselves 
semicircular,  and  hence  present  a  longer  radius  than  those  of  the 
first  four. 


CHAPTER  III. 


Roman  and  Romanesque  Vaults. 


WHEN  we  know  the  means  employed  to  construct  a  groined 
vault,  we  easily  comprehend  the  reason  for  the  modifi- 
cation of  the  Roman  groined  vault.  To  make  a  vault,  it  requires 
wooden  centres  upon  which  to  place  the  courses.  Now  to  make 
a  Roman  groined  vault,  it  is  neces- 
sary to  make  four  semicircular 
centres  and  two  diagonal  centres, 
whose  curve  is  given  by  the  meet- 
ing of  the  half-cylinders  ;  the  curve 
of  the  diagonal  centres  is  not  a 
semicircle,  "but  an  ellipse  that  is  g< 
obtained  by  means  of  ordinates,  j 
as  shown  in  Figure  4.  -H 

Let  A  B  represent  the  diameter 
of  the  cylinders,  and  B  C  the 
horizontal  trace  of  the  plane  in 
which  the  two  cylinders  A  B  and 
A  C  meet.  Working  upon  a 
quarter-section,  and  dividing  the 

revolved  semicircle  into  a  certain  number  of  equal  parts  —  D  E, 
E  F.  F  G,  G  B  —  we  let  fall  perpendiculars  from  these  dividing  points, 
D,  E,  F,  G,  upon  the  diameter  A  B,  prolonging  them  to  meet  the 


Fig.  4. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


25 


diagonal  B  C.  We  thus  obtain  upon  that  diagonal  the  dividing  points, 
d,  e,  f,  g ;  from  these  points,  erecting  perpendiculars  upon  the 
diagonal  B  C,  and  taking  upon  these  perpendiculars  the  distances  dd', 
equal  to  D  D',  e  e',  equal  to  E  E',  etc.,  we  determine  the  points  d',  e', 
f,  g',  through  which  the  curve  of  the  intersection  of  the  two  half- 
cylinders  must  pass.  This  curve,  having  a  versed  sine  (fleche),  dd', 
equal  to  the  radius  D  D',  and  a  diameter  B  C,  greater  than  the 
diameter  A  B,  cannot  be  a  semicircle.  Although  very  simple,  this 
geometrical  drawing  appeared  too  complicated  to  the  Romanesque 
builders.  Accordingly,  having  described  a  semicircle  upon  the 
diameter  A  B,  in  order  to  cut  out  the  timber  centres  of  the  four 
arches  generating  the  vault,  they  described  a  second  semicircle 
upon  the  diameter  B  C,  in  order  to  cut  out  the  two  diagonal  cen- 
tres. Thus  the  keystones  d  of  meeting  of  these  two  diagonal  centres 
were  found  to  be  situated  on  a  higher  level  than  the  keystones 
D  of  the  generating  arches ;  and  the  vault,  instead  of  resulting 
from  the  meeting  of  two  half-cylinders,  was  a  nameless  compound 
of  curved  surfaces,  but  resembling  a  dome.  This  elementary 
demonstration  is  necessary,  for  it  is  the  key  to  the  whole  system  of 
vaults  in  the  Middle  Ages. 

This  first  result,  due  rather  to  ignorance  than  to  design,  was, 
nevertheless,  one  of  the  most  fertile  principles  in  the  history  of  con- 
struction. Moreover,  it  indicates  something  different  from  dense 
ignorance ;  it  denotes  a  certain  liberty  of  thought  in  the  use  of  the 
means  of  building,  the  importance  of  which  is  considerable,  and,  in 
fact,  once  freed  from  Roman  traditions,  the  builders  of  the  Middle 
Ages  were  more  and  more  consistent  with  their  principles.  They 
soon  comprehended  the  full  extent  of  these,  and  gave  themselves  up 
freely  to  them;  nevertheless,  let  us  follow  them  step  by  step. 

The  problem  was,  then,  the  principle  once  admitted  of  the  Roman 
groined  vault  modified  in  this  way,  to  apply  these  vaults  to  oblong 
plans,  for  the  builders  recognized  the  danger  of  wide  barrel  or 
cradle  vaults;  that  is,  barrel-vaults  having  a  wide  span. 


26 


ROMAN  AND  ROMANESQUE  VAULTS. 


Fig.  5. 


Let  A,  B,  C,  D,  then  (Fig.  5),  be  the  plan  of  a  compartment  of  a 
nave  which  is  to  be  covered  by  a  groined  vault. 

Let  A,  E,  B  be  the  semicircular  extrados  of  the  transverse  arches 
in   plan,  and  A,  F,  C,  the 
semicircular   extrados  of 
the   wall-arches   likewise  in 
plan. 

It  is  clear  that  the  radius  , 
H  F,  will  be   shorter  than 
the  radius  G  E ,  therefore, 
the  keystone   E  will  be 
higher  than  the  keystone  F. 

If  we  describe  a  semicircle 
upon  the  diagonal  A  D,  as 
being  the  curve  on  which  the 
vaults  generated  by  the  semi- 
circles A,  E,  B,  and  A,  F,  C,  must  meet,  it  will  result  that  the  groins 
A  I,  B  I,  D  I  and  C  I,  instead  of  projecting  throughout  all  their 
extent,  will  be,  on  the  contrary,  in  retreat  for  almost  two-thirds  of 
their  length,  and  chiefly  so  in  approaching  the  keystone  /. 

Thus,  let  Figure  6  be  the 
transverse  section  of  the  vault 
through  H  0. 

Let  H'F'  be  the  section  of 
the  wall-arch,  H'  T  0'  the  ver- 
tical projection  of  the  diagonal 
A  D  or  B  C. 

The  straight  line  drawn  from  the  keystone  F'  to  the  keystone  /' 
leaves  a  segment  of  a  circle,  K,  L,  I',  above  that  line,  whence 
it  would  result  that  this  portion  of  the  vault  must  be  convex  on  the 
intrados,  instead  of  being  concave,  and  that,  consequently,  it  would 
not  be  constructible. 

Placing,  then,  wall-arches  and  transverse  arches  upon  the  diagonal 


Fig.  6. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


■27 


arches  and  courses  of  planks  to  close  the  triangles  of  the  vaults  in 
masonry,  the  builders  covered  these  courses  with  a  thick  mass  of 
earth,  following  a  curve  given  by  three  points,  F,  I',  F" ;  that  is  to 
say,  given  by  the  summits  of  the  diagonal  and  wall  arches  ;  thus 
the  diagonal  groins  were  made  projecting,  and  upon  this  mass 

they  placed  rows  of  stones 
parallel  with  the  section  FT,  to 
close  the  vault. 

The  result  of  these  blind 
efforts  was  that  the  groined 
vaults  were  no  longer  the  inter- 
sections of  cylinders  or  cones, 
but  ellipsoidal.  The  first  diffi- 
culty being  cleared,  improve- 
ments were  not  slow  to  develop. 
But  first,  how,  by  what  me- 
chanical processes  were  these 
vaults  constructed?  The  Roman  groined  vault,  built  in  compart- 
ments, had  no  transverse  arches ;  it  rested  upon  piers  or  projecting 
columns,  as  represented  in  Figure  7,  —  that  is  to  say  (see  the  hori- 
zontal plan  A  of  one  of  these  vaults),  the  diagonals  B  C  and  D  E, 
formed  by  the  intersection  of  two  half-cylinders  of  equal  diameter 
and  forming  projecting  groins,  rested  upon  the  projecting  corners 
of  the  piers. 

But  the  Romanesque  architects  having  at  first  reinforced  the  large 
cradle-vaults  by  transverse  arches,  as  shown  in  Figure  3,  and  having 
come  to  replace  these  semicylindrical  vaults  by  oblong  groined 
vaults,  kept  the  transverse  arches;  they  could  not  do  otherwise, 
since  the  diagonals  of  these  vaults  were  semicircular,  and  their 
summit  rose  above  the  summit  of  the  arches,  whose  diameter  was 
given  by  the  distance  between  the  piers. 

In  order  to  make  ourselves  clear,  let  Figure  8  be  the  longitudinal 
section  of  a  Roman  groined  vault  composed  of  compartments ;  the 


Fig.  7. 


28  ROMAN  AND  ROMANESQUE  VAULTS. 


line  A  B  is  horizontal  and  is  the  section  of  the  longitudinal  semi- 
cylinder. 

Let  Figure  8b  be  the  longitudinal  section  of  a  Romanesque  groined 
vault  in  oblong  form ;  then  the  line  A  B  is  a  succession  of  curves,  or 
at  least  of  broken  lines  uniting  the  points  C  and  D,  the  summits  of 


Fig.  8. 

the  transverse  arches,  to  the  point  of  meeting,  E,  of  the  diagonal 
semicircles.  They  are  obliged,  necessarily,  to  preserve  under  the 
points  C  and  D  of  the  projecting  arches,  transverse  arches  which,  as 


Fig.  86. 


we  said  before,  were  only  permanent  centres.  From  that  time  the 
diagonal  groins  had  to  take  their  point  of  departure  in  the  rear  of 
the  projection  of  the  piers  or  columns ;  these  being  destined  only  to 
carry  the  transverse  arches  ;  that  is  to  say  (Fig.  9),  the  groins  had  to 
start  from  points  F  instead  of  from  G,  while  the  abutments  of  the 
transverse  arches  rested  upon  the  imposts  F,  H,  G,  I.    When  it 


CONSTRUCTION. 


29 


was  necessarv  then  to  close  the  vaults,  the  builders  placed  the  planks 

bearing  the  masonry  or  earthen  forms  upon  the  extrados  of  these 

transverse  arches  and  upon  the  two  diagonal  centres  of  timber. 

In  the  architecture  of  all  building  nations,  logical  deductions  follow 

one  another  with  fatal  severity.    One  step  forward  can  never  be  the 

last,  one  must  always  go  on ;  from  the  moment  that  a  principle  is 

the  result  of  reasoning,  it  at  once  becomes  its  slave.    Such  is  the 

spirit  of  the  Western  nations ;  it  comes  out  as  soon  as  the  society  of 

the  Middle  Ages  begins  to  be  conscious  and  to  organize  itself;  it 

could  not  be  checked,  for  the  first  man  who  founds  a  principle  upon 

a  course  of  reasoning  cannot  say  to  Reason,  "  Thou  shalt  go  no 

M^HHjanHMHMH^  farther."  The  builders,  in 
< 

the  shadow  of  the  cloisters, 
recognized  this  principle 
from  the  time  of  the  elev- 
enth century. 

One  hundred  years  later 
they  were  no  longer  the 
masters  of  it.  Bishops, 
monks,  nobles,  commoners, 
had  they  wished,  could  not 
have  prevented  the  Roman- 
esque architects  from  pro- 
ducing the  architecture 
termed  Gothic;  the  latter 
was  only  the  predestined 
consequence  of  the  former. 
Those  who  pretend  to  see  in  Gothic  architecture  (entirely  secular) 
anything  else  than  the  emancipation  of  a  nation  of  artists  and  arti- 
sans, who,  having  been  taught  to  reason,  reason  better  than  their 
masters,  and  with  the  forces  put  into  their  hands,  carry  them  in 
spite  of  themselves  very  far  from  the  goal  that  at  first  they  wished 
to  reach;   those   who  believed   that   Gothic   architecture  is  an 


Fig.  9. 


30 


ROMAN  AND  ROMANESQUE  VAULTS. 


exception,  a  caprice  of  the  human  mind,  have  certainly  not  studied 
its  principle,  which  is  but  the  rigorous  application  of  the  system 
inaugurated  by  the  Romanesque  constructors.  It  will  be  easy  for 
us  to  demonstrate  it.    Let  us  go  on. 

We  see  already,  at  the  end  of  the  eleventh  century,  the  principle 
of  the  Roman  groined  vault  laid  aside.1 

The  transverse  arches  are  definitely  admitted  as  a  vital  force, 
elastic  and  free,  a  framework  on  which  rests  the  vault  proper.  If 
the  builders  admitted  that  these  permanent  centres  were  useful 
transversely,  they  must  likewise  admit  their  usefulness  longitudi- 
nally. No  longer  considering  the  vaults  as  a  homogeneous,  concrete 
crust,  but  as  a  series  of  panels  with  curved  surfaces,  free,  and  rest- 
ing upon  flexible  arches,  the  rigidity  of  the  lateral  walls  contrasted 
with  the  new  system.  It  was  necessary  that  these  panels  should  be 
free  in  every  direction ;  otherwise,  the  breaks  and  fractures  would 
have  been  so  much  the  more  dangerous  when  these  vaults  were  fixed 
upon  flexible  arches  in  one  direction  and  upon  rigid  walls  in  the  other. 
They  stretched  wall-arches  from  one  pier  to  another,  over  the  walls, 
longitudinally.  These  wall-arches  are  only  transverse  semi-arches, 
sunk  partly  in  the  walls,  but  not  depending  upon  its  construction. 
By  this  means  the  vaults  rested  solely  upon  the  piers,  and  the  walls 
"became  only  enclosures,  which,  at  need,  could  be  built  afterward 
or  omitted.  It  required  an  impost  for  these  wall-arches,  a  par- 
ticular point  of  support,  so  the  Romanesque  builders  added  for 
this  purpose  a  new  member  to  their  piers,  and  the  groined  vault  took 
its  start  in  the  re-entering  angle  formed  by  the  abutment  of  the 
transverse  arch  and  that  of  the  wall-arch,  as  indicated  in  Figure  10. 
A  is  the  transverse  arch,  B  the  wall-arch,  C  the  groin  of  the  vault ; 
the  plan  of  the  pier  is  in  D,  but  if  the  pier  was  detached,  if  a  nave 
was  accompanied  by  aisles,  it  would  take  the  form  of  Figure 

1  It  is  in  the  nave  of  the  church  at  Vezelay  that  one  must  admit  the  abandon- 
ment of  the  Roman  system.  There  the  high,  groined  vaults,  upon  an  oblong 
plan,  are  the  intersection  of  ellipsoids,  with  projecting  transverse  arches  and 
wall-arches. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


31 


106.    A  is  the  transverse  arch  of  the  great  vault,  B  the  archi volts 

bearing   upon  the  wall. 

Above  these  archivolts, 
this  wall  retreats  in  F, 
so  as  to  allow  the  pilas- 
ters G  to  carry  the  higher 
wall-arches.  C  is 
the  transverse  arch  of 
the  aisles,  D  the  groins 
of  the  vaults  of  this  aisle, 
and  IT  those  of  the  high 
vaults.  The  vaults  of  the 
aisles  are  stretched  over 
the  transverse  arches  C, 
the  extrados  of  the  archi- 
volts B,  and  upon  a  wall- 
arch  partly  sunk  in  the 
wall  of  the  aisle,  and 
resembling  the  high  e  r 
wall-arches  in  Figure  10. 
Accordingly,  then,  the 
mouldings  of  the  vaults 
at  once  give  the  horizon- 
tal section  of  the  piers, 
and  their  form  is  derived 
from  these  mouldings. 

Nevertheless,  these 
vaults  were  insufficiently 
buttressed,  and  move- 
ments were  seen  in  the 
piers ;  consequently, 
the  principal  sinews 
of  the  vaults,  the  transverse  arches,  were  put  out  of  shape.  Not 


Fig.  10. 


32 


ROMAN  AND  ROMANESQUE  VAULTS. 


knowing  how  to  support  the  pressure,  the  builders  occupied  them- 
selves at  first  in  rendering  the  effect  of  this  less  disastrous.  They 
had  observed  that  the  greater  the  section  presented  by  the  stones 
of  an  arch  from  the  intrados  to  the  extrados,  the  greater  would  be 
the  disorder  occasioned  by  the  movement  produced  in  that  arch. 

They  were  not  the  first  who  had  recognized  that  law.  The 
Romans,  before  them,  when  they  had  large  arches  to  raise,  had  been 
careful  to  make  them  of  several  rows  of  voussoirs,  concentric, 


Fig.  I  I. 


but  independent  of  one  another,  as  indicated  by  Figure  11  in  A. 
The  arches  built  in  this  way  form,  as  it  were,  so  many  rings,  acting 
separately  and  preserving  much  greater  elasticity,  and,  therefore, 
greater  resistance  than  in  an  arch  of  the  same  section,  built  after 
the  method  indicated  in  B. 

The  Romanesque  builders,  according  to  this  principle,  composed 
their  transverse  arches  of  two  concentric  rows  of  voussoirs ;  the  one, 
that  of  the  intrados,  taking  a  longer  section  or  portion  of  radius 
than  that  of  the  extrados,  and,  as  the  transverse  arches  were  only 
permanent  centres,  designed  to  receive  the  ends  of  the  planks  on 
which  they  built  the  masonry  of  the  vault,  they  allowed  the  second 
row  of  voussoirs  to  project  beyond  the  first  row  sufficiently  to  sup- 
port the  ends  of  these  planks. 

Figure  12  explains  this  method.    In  A  is  the  row  of  voussoirs  on 


CONSTRUCTION. 


33 


the  intrados ;  in  B,  that  of  the  stones  of  the  extrados  with  the  two 
projections  C,  designed  to  receive  the  ends  of  the  planks  D,  over 
which  they  built  the  masonry  of  the  vaults. 

The  wall-arches,  having  a  smaller  diameter,  and  not  being  subject 
to  the  effects  of  the  pressure,  are  composed  of  a  single  row  of 


Fig.  12.  Fig.  12a. 


voussoirs  having,  as  Figure  12a  shows,  the  projection  necessary  to 
hold  the  planks. 

We  now  see  that  the  Romanesque  builders  plainly  exposed  their 
means  of  construction;  that,  far  from  seeking  to  disguise  them,  they 
determined  their  architecture  by  those  very  means. 

Does  any  one  wish  another  proof  of  this  fact  ? 

The  Romans  terminated  the  tops  of  their  columns  by  capitals,  but 
the  projection  of  the  abacus  of  these  capitals  supported  nothing ;  it 
was  only  an  ornament. 

Accordingly,  when  the  Romans  rested  a  groined  vault  upon 
columns,  as  frequently  happened,  for  example,  in  the  halls  of  the 
therma?  (hot  baths),  the  abutment  of  the  vault  was  in  a  vertical  line 
with  the  body  of  the  column  (Fig.  13).  And  then  a  singular  fact,  for 
which  no  one  can  account,  the  shaft  of  the  Roman  column  bore  not 
only  its  capital,  but  the  complete  entablature  of  the  order;  so  that, 
in  point  of  fact,  all  the  parts  comprehended  between  A  and  B  served 
no  purpose,  and  the  broad  projections  B  could  be  used  only  to 


34 


ROMAN  AND  ROMANESQUE  VAULTS. 


support  the  wooden  centres  destined  to  close  the  vaults.  It  must 
be  granted  that  this  was  a  great  luxury  for  an  accessory  object. 

When  the  Romanesque  builders  place  an  arch  upon  a  column, 
whether  free  or  engaged,  the  capital  is  only  a  corbel  destined  to 
receive  the  abutment  of  the  arch,  a  projection  serving  as  a  link 
between    the  i 
cylindrical  shaft 
of   the  column 
and  the  square 
impost  of  the 
abutment  (Fig. 
14).    Then  the  capital  is  not 
only  an  ornament,  but  a  useful 
member  of  the  structure  (see 
"Chapiteau  "). 

If  the  Romanesque  builders 
had  to  place  a  crowning  cor- 
nice at  the  top  of  a  wall  on 
the  outside,  being  economical 
of  the  time  and  of  materials, 
they  took  great  care  not  to 
carve  out,  at  great  expense, 
the  different  members  of  that 
cornice  from  a  single  stone ;  A 
they  set,  for  example,  project- 
ing corbels  between  the  last 
row  of  stones,  and  upon  these  F|s-  l3* 

corbels  they  placed  a  stone  coping  to  serve  as  a  drain  for  the  roof 
(see  "Cor niche"}. 

It  is  useless  to  insist  further  upon  these  details,  which  will  pre- 
sent themselves  in  their  place  in  the  course  of  this  work. 

The  construction  of  vaults,  then,  was  the  great  object  of  the  archi- 
tects of  the  Middle  Ages ;  they  had  arrived,  as  we  have  shown,  at 


CONSTRUCTION. 


35 


combinations  ingenious  in  themselves,  although  they  had  not  yet 
found  suitable  means  for  firmly  maintaining  these  vaults,  and  were 
reduced  to  expedients  for  them.  Thus,  for  example,  they  filled  in 
these  vaults  with  tufa,  or  with  light  materials,  in  order  to  diminish 
the  effects  of  thrust;  they  reduced  them  in  thickness  as  much  as 

possible ;  they  filled  in 
the  masonry  under  the 
roof  of  the  aisles  in 
the  line  of  the  thrust, 
in  the  hope  of  pre- 
venting  the  deflection 
of  the  piers ;  they  placed 
at  the  base  of  these  but- 
tresses transverse  ties  of 
wood,  concealed  by  the 
slope  of  the  roof,  in 
order  to  unite  the  piers 
and  the  outer  walls. 
These  expedients  suf- 
ficed in  small  construc- 
tions; in  large  ones 
they  availed  nothing 
but  to  mitigate  the 
effects  of  the  pressure, 
without  completely  de- 
stroying them. 
F'g*  1 4-  We  must  take  account 

of  these  effects  in  order  to  understand  the  series  of  reasonings  and 
attempts  by  which  the  builders  passed  from  ignorance  to  scientific 
knowledge. 

Let  (Fig.  15)  be  the  cross-section  of  a  Romanesque  church  at  the 
end  of  the  eleventh  century,  built,  like  that  at  Vezelay,  with  groined 
vaults  over  the  aisles  and  over  the  central  nave. 


3G 


R OMA N  i [ND  RO MA NESQ UE  VA UL TS. 


In  A,  the  structure  is  represented  as  the  architect  had  designed 
it ;  in  B,  as  the  pressure  of  the  vaults  had  forced  it  out  of  shape. 
They  had  taken  the  precaution  of  leaving  iron  tie-bars  C  D,  at  the 


forged,  had  been  broken.  A  century  and  a  half  after  the  construc- 
tion of  the  nave,  the  effects  produced  had  already  caused  the  ruin 
of  several  vaults,  and  they  had  hastily  built  the  exterior  flying-but- 
tresses E,  indicated  by  dots  upon  our  drawing. 

These  effects  were :  First,  the  bending  of  the  piers  and  walls  which 
bind  them  from  F  to  G,  the  consequent  sinking  of  the  transverse 


arches  at  H  at  the  key  and  the  crushing  of  the  beds  of  the  voussoirs 
forming  the  haunches  of  these  arches,  at  I'm  the  intrados  ;  Secondly, 
the  dislocation  of  the  transverse  arches  K,  of  the  aisles  as  indicated 
in  our  figure ;  and  hence,  again  the  bending  of  the  exterior  walls  L, 
of  the  aisles.  These  effects  were  produced  everywhere  in  the  same 
manner.  In  studying  them  the  builders  thought,  not  without  reason, 
since  the  fact  is  constant,  that  the  whole  evil  was  produced  by  the 
pressure  of  the  semicircular  arches  and  of  the  vaults  that  they  partly 
support ;  that  the  too  flat  concavity  of  these  vaults  had  an  oblique 


springing  of  the  transverse  arches ;  but  these  bars,  probably  poorly 


vl 


Fig.  I  5. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


37 


action,  beyond  the  safety  point;  that  the  thrust  of  a  semicircular 
arch  increases  in  direct  ratio  with  its  action  ;  that  the  dislocation 
undergone  by  these  arches  shows  their  weak  points,  viz.,  the  key 
and  the  haunches ;  that  at  all  times  when  a  semicircular  arch  is  not 
perfectly  buttressed,  and  when  the  piers  that  support  it  diverge, 
these  arches  are  thrown  out  of  shape,  as  indicated  in  Figure  16. 

Let  this  be  a  vault,  the  diameter  of  whose  transverse  arches  is 
7.00  metres,  and  the  thickness  of  its  voussoirs  0.G0  c. ;  the  walls 
have  spread  at  the  springing  of  the  arches  by  0.20  c.  each ;  hence 
the  diameter  of  the  half-circle,  whose  centre  is  at  B,  has  increased  to 


i  • 

1    Jy            \\  \\ 

i  v/y  i  WW 

SL 

— — f"7  —  fP1 

Fig.  16. 

7.40  m.,  and  the  points  a  at  the  extremity  of  the  transverse  arches 
have  receded  to  a'.  The  segment  ab,  which  is  a  little  less  than  a 
quarter  of  the  half-circle  takes  the  position  a'  1/ ;  for,  supposing  that 
the  pier  breaks  and  turns  upon  a  point  placed  at  3.00  m.  below  the 
spring  of  the  arch,  that  extremity  a'  will  descend  below  the  level  of 
the  point  a,  and  the  centre  B  will  rise  to  V.  The  consequences 
of  this  first  movement  will  be  : 

First,  the  fall  of  the  key  D  to  d,  and  the  sinking  of  the  segment 
b  c  to  V  c'. 


38 


R  OMAN  AND  R  OMANESQ  UE  VA  UL  TS. 


This  effect  will  continue  until  the  diagonal  curve  b  e  drawn 
from  the  intrados  to  the  extrados  of  the  segment,  b  c,  shall  be 
shorter  than  the  distance  between  b'  and  e'.  We  should  remark 
in  passing,  that  the  Romanesque  vaults,  which  people  suppose  to 
have  been  built  in  elliptical  form,  have  acquired  that  curve  only- 
through  the  divergence  of  the  piers. 

Forty  centimetres  of  divergence  between  these  piers,  out  of  the 
vertical,  give  forty  centimetres  fall  from  the  summit  of  the  arch; 
and  the  difference  between  the  radius  of  an  arch,  in  this  case,  and 
the  rise  of  the  curve,  is  then  80  c. 


CHAPTER  IV. 


Origin  of  the  Pointed  Arch. 

THE  builders  could  not  but  notice  these  effects,  and  seek  means  to 
prevent  them.  The  first  means  they  seem  to  have  used  are  these  : 
having  a  nave  whose  transverse  arches  were  7.00  m.  in  diameter  at 
the  intrados,  and  0.60  c.  thick  as  to  their  voussoirs,  and  having 


Fig.  17. 


observed  (Fig.  1G)  that  the  segment  b'  c'  in  sinking  pressed  the 
lower  segment  a'  b'  on  the  intrados  at  b',  and  the  key  at  the  extrados 
in  e',  they  concluded  that  the  curvilinear  triangle  V  e'  c'  was  useless, 
and  that  the  diagonal  b'  e'  alone  offered  any  resistance  ;  then,  starting 


40 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  POINTED  ARCH. 


from  this  principle,  they  drew  (Fig.  17)  the  two  semicircles  of  the 
intrados  and  extrados  A  B  C,  and  D  E  F :  then  upon  the  diameter 
A  C,  they  sought  the  centre  0,  of  an  arc  joining  the  point  A  on  the 
intrados  to  the  point  E,  on  the  extrados  of  the  semicircle. 

Placing  a  joint  at  E  G,  instead  of  a  key-stone,  in  order  to  avoid 
the  effect  of  equilibrium  seen  in  Figure  16,  they  cut  the  voussoirs  of 
this  new  arch  A  E,  following  the  lines  normal  to  the  curve  A  E,  that 
is  to  say,  tending  toward  the  centre  0. 

If  fractures  still  occurred  in  these  transverse  arches,  thus  com- 
posed of  two  diagonal  curves  A  E,  the  builders  proceeded  with  that 
arch  A  E  as  with  the  semicircle  —  that  is  to  say,  they  pushed  the 
centre  from  0  to  0'  upon  the  diameter  in  such  a  way  as  to  obtain  an 
arc  joining  the  point  A  to  G. 

Thus,  in  the  vaults  of  the  twelfth  century,  we  see  little  by  little 
the  transverse  arches  giving  up  the  semicircular  form  to  approach  the 
pointed  arch. 

The  best  proof  that  we  can  give  in  support  of  our  hypothesis,  is 
the  accurate  list  of  a  great  number  of  these  primitive,  broken  arches 
which  have  a  rise  longer  than  the  radius,  by  exactly  once,  twice,  or 
three  times  the  thickness  of  their  skewbacks.  But  this  proof  is 
evidence  only  to  those  who  have  been  able  to  measure  exactly  a  large 
number  of  transverse  arches  of  that  epoch.  We  give,  then,  a  general 
observation  which  can  be  made  by  all  the  world,  without  recourse  to 
measures  difficult  of  access. 

There  are  districts,  like  Ile-de-France,  for  example,  where  the 
Romanesque  semicircular  transverse  arches  have  only  a  slight  thick- 
ness of  voussoirs.  Now,  here  in  the  first  vaults  having  pointed 
arches,  the  acuteness  of  these  arches  is  scarcely  perceptible,  while  in 
the  provinces  where  the  Romanesque  semicircular  transverse  arches 
are  very  thick,  as  in  Burgundy,  the  acuteness  of  the  transverse 
arches,  in  the  first  vaults  abandoning  the  semicircle,  is  much  more 
marked. 

The  adoption  of  the  pointed  arch  was  so  surely  the  result  of  the 


CONSTRUCTION. 


41 


observations  which  the  builders  had  made  upon  the  dislocation  of 
the  semicircular  arches,  namely,  the  displacement  of  the  haunches 
and  the  sinking  of  the  key-stone,  that  there  exists  a  large  number  of 
transverse  arches  of  the  twelfth  century  drawn  as  indicated  in 
Figure  18;  that  is  to  say,  having  four  centres  :  two  centres,  A,  for 
the  portion  of  arcs  B  C  and  D  E,  and  two  centres,  G,  for  the  por- 
tions of  arcs  CD,  comprehending  the  haunches,  this  being  done  in 
order  to  present  from  C  to  D  a  greater  resistance  to  the  effect  of 
displacement  felt  between  the  points  C  and  D ;  for  the  nearer  the 
line  C  D  comes  to  being  a  straight  line,  the  less  is  it  subject  to 
breakage  from  within  outward,  and  by  this  design  the  builders 

avoided  giving  the  trans- 
verse arches  an  acuteness 
which  could  not  fail  to  give 
a  shock  to  those  still  accus- 
tomed to  the  semicircle. 

From  the  moment  when 
the  transverse  arch  formed 
by  two  circular  arcs  had 
replaced  the  semicircular, 
there  flowed  from  this 
innovation  a  stream  of  con- 
sequences, which  was  to 
Flg'  l8,  carry  the  builders  very  far 

beyond  the  goal  which  they  expected  to  reach.  The  broken  arch,  or 
the  pointed  arch  (since  that  is  its  true  name),  used  as  a  means  of 
construction,  rendered  necessary  by  the  general  structure  of  the 
large  nave  vaults,  and  obtained  by  observing  the  effects  resulting 
from  the  thrust  of  semicircular  arches,  is  a  veritable  revolution  in 
the  history  of  the  art  of  building. 

People  say :  "  The  builders  of  the  Middle  Ages,  in  adopting  the 
pointed  arch,  have  invented  nothing;  there  are  broken  arches  in 
the  most  ancient  monuments  of  Greece  and  of  Etruria.    The  section 


42 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  POINTED  ARCH. 


of  the  Treasury  of  Atreus  at  Mycenae  gives  a  pointed  arch,  etc." 
This  is  true,  but  they  always  omit  one  sufficiently  important  fact : 
that  the  stones  composing  these  arches  are  set  corbelwise,  and  that 
their  beds  are  not  normal  to  the  curve,  but  horizontal.  This  is  less 
than  nothing  to  those  who  take  account  only  of  the  outer  form,  but 
for  us  practitioners  this  detail,  nevertheless,  has  its  importance. 
And  furthermore,  if  the  Greeks  and  Romans  had  made  vaults  pro- 
duced by  broken  arcs,  what  would  that  matter  if  the  general  prin- 
ciple of  the  construction  be  not  derived  from  the  combination  of 
these  curves  and  from  the  observation  of  their  oblique  effects  ? 

It  is  evident  that,  from  the  day  when  man  invented  the  compass 
and  the  means  of  describing  circles,  he  has  discovered  the  broken 
arch ;  and  of  what  consequence  is  it  to  us  if  he  did  not  establish  a 
complete  system  upon  the  observation  of  the  properties  of  these 
arches  ?  Some,  on  the  other  hand,  have  been  pleased  to  see,  in  the 
use  of  the  pointed  arch  for  the  construction  of  vaults,  a  symbolical 
or  mystical  idea ;  they  have  pretended  to  demonstrate  that  these 
arches  had  a  deeper  religious  meaning  than  the  semicircular  arch. 
But  men  were  quite  as  religious  at  the  beginning  of  the  twelfth  cen- 
tury as  at  the  end,  if  not  more  so,  and  the  pointed  arch  appears  at 
precisely  the  moment  when  the  spirit  of  analysis,  or  the  study  of  the 
exact  sciences  and  of  philosophy,  began  to  spring  up  in  the  midst  of 
a  society  up  to  that  time  almost  theocratic. 

The  pointed  arch  and  its  widespread  consequences  in  construction 
appear  in  our  monuments  when  the  art  of  architecture  is  practised 
by  the  laity,  and  comes  out  of  the  seclusion  of  the  cloisters,  where, 
until  this  time,  it  had  been  exclusively  cultivated. 

The  last  Romanesque  builders,  those  who,  after  so  many  attempts, 
had  finally  dismissed  the  semicircle,  are  not  visionaries ;  they  do  not 
reason  upon  the  mystical  meaning  of  a  curve ;  they  do  not  know  if 
the  pointed  arch  is  more  religious  than  the  semicircular  arch ;  they 
build  —  a  more  difficult  task  than  idle  dreaming. 

These  constructors  have  to  sustain  large  and  high  vaults  upon 


CONSTRUCTION. 


isolated  piers ;  they  tremble  whenever  they  strike  a  centre ;  from 
day  to  day  they  remedy  defects  as  they  appear.  They  observe 
with  disquietude  the  divergence,  the  least  effect  produced,  and  this 
observation  is  a  constant  and  fertile  source  of  instruction.  They 
have  only  vague,  incomplete  traditions,  and  obscurity  about  them, 
and  the  monuments  that  they  build  are  their  only  model.  It  is  upon 
these  that  they  make  experiments ;  they  have  recourse  only  to 
themselves,  and  refer  only  to  their  personal  observations. 

When  we  study  carefully  the  constructions  raised  at  the  begin- 
ning of  the  twelfth  century,  when  we  come  to  classify  them  chrono- 
logically, and  follow  the  progress  of  the  principal  schools  of  builders 
in  France,  Burgundy,  Normandy  and  Champagne,  we  are  still 
seized  to-day  by  that  species  of  fever  that  possessed  these  con- 
structors ;  we  share  their  anxiety,  their  haste,  to  arrive  at  a  sure 
result ;  we  recognize  their  advances  from  one  structure  to  another ; 
we  applaud  their  perseverance,  the  justice  of  their  reasoning,  the 
evolution  of  their  knowledge,  so  limited  at  first,  so  profound  soon 
afterwards.  In  truth,  such  a  study  is  useful  to  us,  builders  of  the 
nineteenth  century,  who  are  disposed  to  take  the  appearance  for 
the  reality,  and  who  often  substitute  vulgarity  for  good  sense. 

Already,  at  the  beginning  of  the  twelfth  century,  the  pointed  arch 
was  adopted  for  the  large  cradle-vaults  in  a  part  of  Burgundy,  in 
Ile-de-France  and  in  Champagne ;  that  is  to  say,  in  the  provinces 
which  were  the  most  advanced  and  most  active,  if  not  the  richest. 

The  naves  of  the  churches  of  Beaune,  of  Saulieu,  of  Charite- 
sur-Loire,  of  the  Cathedral  of  Autun,  are  covered  by  cradle-vaults 
formed  by  two  intersecting,  circular  arcs,  although,  even  in  these 
structures,  the  archivolts  of  the  doors  and  windows  remain  full- 
centre.  It  is  a  necessity  of  construction  which  imposes  the  divided 
arch  upon  these  edifices,  and  not  an  individual  taste ;  for  (a  remark- 
able fact)  all  the  architectural  details  of  these  monuments  reproduce 
certain  antique  forms  borrowed  from  the  Gallo-Iloman  edifices  of 
the  Province.     Thanks  to  that  innovation  of  the  divided  arch 


44 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  POINTED  ARCH. 


applied  to  cradle-vaults,  these  churches  have  remained  standing  until 
our  day,  not,  however,  without  having  suffered  disturbances  grave 
enough  to  necessitate,  two  centuries  later,  the  use  of  new  means 
suitable  to  prevent  their  ruin. 

But  the  edifices  in  which  one  grasps  the  transition  from  the 
Romanesque  system  of  construction  to  that  known  as  Gothic,  is 
the  porch  of  the  church  at  Yezelay.  This  porch  is  in  itself  alone  a 
monument,  consisting  of  a  nave  in  three  divisions  with  aisles  and 
vaulted  gallery  above. 

The  plan  of  this  porch,  built  about  1130 1  is  entirely  Romanesque  } 
and  does  not  differ  from  that  of  the  nave,  built  thirty  years  earlier ; 
but  its  cross-section  presents  notable  differences  from  that  of  the  nave. 

Already,  toward  the  end  of  the  eleventh  century,  the  constructors 
of  the  nave  of  the  church  of  Vezelay  had  taken  a  great  step  in 
replacing  the  high  vaults,  hitherto  cradle-shaped,  by  groined  vaults  ; 
but  these  vaults  built  upon  an  oblong  plan,  and  produced  by  trans- 
verse arches  and  semicircular  wall-arches,  show  us  the  gropings,  the 
uncertainty,  and  the  inexperience  of  the  constructors  (see  "Archi- 
tecture Religieuse"  Fig.  21).  In  the  porch,  all  the  arches  are 
pointed,  the  vaults  are  groined  without  projecting  diagonal  arches, 
and  constructed  of  plastered,  rough  stones ;  the  high  vaults  are  very 
skilfully  buttressed  by  those  of  the  galleries  of  the  first  story.  This 
ensemble  presents  a  perfect  stability. 

We  give  (Fig.  19)  the  cross-section  of  the  porch  of  Vezelay:  the 
vaults  of  the  galleries  are  produced  by  the  wall-arches  A,  of  the 
great  vaults,  which  are  true  archivolts,  and  by  the  wall-arches  B, 
whose  origin  is  much  lower  down ;  hence  the  slope  A  B  of  the  key- 
stones of  the  lateral  vaults,  which  form  a  continuous  buttress  en- 
closing the  large  vaults. 

1  It  must  here  be  said  that  the  Burgundian  architecture  was  at  least  twenty-five 
years  behind  that  of  Ile-de-France  ;  but  transitional  monuments  in  Ile-de- 
France  are  wanting.  The  Church  of  Saint-Denis,  built  about  1140.  is  already 
almost  Gothic  as  to  its  construction,  and  the  intermediate  edifices  between  that 
and  those  plainly  Romanesque  no  longer  exist,  or  have  been  almost  entirely 
modified  in  the  thirteenth  century. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


Fig.  19. 


40 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  POINTED  ARCH. 


The  bays  were  oblong,  and  the  wall-arches  starting  on  the  same 
level  as  the  transverse  arches  C,  the  key-stone  of  these  wall-arches 
A  is  on  a  lower  plane  than  the  keys  of  these  transverse  arches;  the 
great  vaults,  in  consequence  of  this  arrangement,  are  very  much 
elevated  while  their  projecting  groins  are  barely  perceptible. 

In  D'  we  have  represented  the  detail  of  the  skewbacks  of  the  arches 
at  the  level  D  of  the  pier,  and  in  G  the  ground  plan,  with  the  start- 
ing point  of  the  arches  and  groins  of  the  vaults. 

This  construction  of  vaults  resembles  in  no  respect  the  Roman 
construction ;  already  the  principle  of  independence  between  the 
different  parts  of  building  is  conceded  and  developed. 

Nevertheless,  these  vaults  of  the  porch  of  Vezelay,  except  two,  are 
not  provided  with  visible  ribs.  They  are  held  in  place  only  by  the 
adhesion  of  the  mortar,  and  form  each  a  homogeneous,  concrete 
cavity  like  the  Roman  vaults.  The  only  two  vaults  of  this  porch 
possessing  such  ribs  could  do  without  them ;  these  are  only  a  decora- 
tion, and  do  not  really  support  the  filling  of  rough  stones.  But  there 
is  in  that  an  attempt  which  soon  had  important  consequences. 

The  builders  had  already  obtained,  by  means  of  the  transverse 
arches  and  wall-arches,  independent  and  resistant  for  each  vault,  a 
sort  of  elastic  frame  upon  which,  if  any  disturbance  occurred,  these 
vaults  could  move  independently  of  one  another.  They  wished  to 
go  farther :  they  wished  the  concave  triangles  of  these  vaults  to  be 
themselves  independent  of  each  other :  and  to  do  this,  they  com- 
posed the  vaults  of  two  quite  distinct  elements :  the  arches  and  the 
fillings;  the  arches  considered  as  permanent,  elastic  centres,  and 
the  fillings  as  neutral  concavities  designed  to  close  up  the  empty 
triangles  left  between  these  arches. 

They  began  by  avoiding  a  preliminary  difficulty  which  had  hither- 
to always  bothered  architects ;  they  returned  to  the  vault  on  a 
square  plan,  consisting  of  two  oblong  divisions,  if  necessity  demanded 
it.  In  other  words,  they  designed  their  vaults  in  a  horizontal 
section,  as  indicated  in  Figure  20. 


CONSTRUCTION.  47 

Let  A  B  C  D,  be  a  square,  perfect  or  nearly  so,  it  matters  little, 
containing  two  divisions  of  naves  A  E  B  F  and  E  C  F  D;  the 
diagonals  A  D  and  B  C  are  those  which  produce  the  vault;  and 
these  two  diagonals  are  the  diameters  of  two  perfect  semicircles, 
represented  in  the  plan ;  these  two  semicircles,  being  of  the  same 
diameter,  necessarily  meet  at  the  point  G,  which  is  the  crowning 
key-stone.  Taking  a  distance  equal  to  the  radius  G  A,  and  moving 
this  radius  around  to  the  perpendicular  G  I,  we  have  described  the 
pointed-arch  E I F  in  such  a  way  that  the  point  /  falls  on  the  point 

G;  this  is  the  transverse 
arch  whose  horizontal  pro- 
jection is  in  E  F. 

Taking  a  line  shorter 
than  the  radius  G  A,  but 
greater  than  one-half  A  B, 
the  width  of  the  nave,  and 
moving  it  around  upon  the 
perpendicular  II K,  we  have 
described  the  pointed  arch 
A  K  B;  this  is  the  trans- 
verse arch  whose  horizontal 

Fig.  20.  Fig.  206. 

projection  is  in  A  B  or  C  D. 

Finally,  taking  a  line  L  M  shorter  than  the  line  II  K  and  longer 
than  one-half  of  the  line  B  F,  we  have  traced  the  pointed  arch  B  M  F, 
which  is  the  wall-arch,  whose  horizontal  projection  is  in  B  F,  F  D,  etc. 

Cutting  wooden  centerings  in  accordance  with  these  four  curves 
laid  out,  upon  the  same  line  0  P  (Fig.  20b),  we  fix  the  arches 
in  stone  on  the  extrados  of  these  centerings,  and  we  have  obtained 
the  framework  of  the  vault  represented  by  Figure  21. 

These  are  the  original  Gothic  vaults  so-called.  It  will  be  noticed 
that  these  vaults  are  produced  by  a  semicircle,  which  in  the  first 
place  furnishes  the  diagonals;  it  is  the  semicircle  which  governs  the 
height  of  the  pointed  arches. 


48 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  POINTED  ARCH. 


The  real  ogival  arches,  it  may  be  said  in  passing  (for  thus 
the  diagonal  arches  are  named),  are,  then,  full-centered,  which  indi- 
cates clearly  enough  that  the  word  ogival  is  not  appropriate  for  the 


Fig.  21. 

broken  arch.  But  this  is  not  the  moment  to  discuss  these  words  (see 
"Ogive  "),  and  our  remark  is  made  here  only  to  point  out  one  of  the 
numerous  errors  upon  which  people  ^ 
rely,  to  judge  of  an  art  with  which 
they  are  but  slightly  acquainted. 

The  broken  arch  had  been 
adopted  by  the  last  Romanesque 
architects,  as  we  have  seen  above, 
to  lessen  the  effects  of  the  thrusts. 
Now  its  function  increases,  and  it 
becomes  a  practical  means  of  closing 
vaults  whose  real  generator  is  the 
semicircular  arch. 

When  (Fig.  22)  a  groined  vault  is  formed  by  two  semi-cylinders  at 
right  angles,  the  arches  A  B,  C  D,  A  C  and  B  D  are  semicircular, 


CONSTRUCTION. 


41) 


and  their  intersections  A  D  and  B  C  are  elliptical,  since  the  key  E 
does  not  rise  above  the  level  of  the  key  F,  while  the  diameters  A  D 
and  B  C  are  longer  than  the  diameters  of  the  semicircles  A  B  and 
CD. 

This  brings  no  danger  if  the  vault  A  B,  C  D  is  homogeneous  and 
concrete ;  if  it  forms  a  crust  in  one  piece  like  the  Roman  vaults. 

But  if  the  builder  wishes  to  preserve  in  the  triangles  of  his  vaults 
a  certain  elasticity,  if  he  wishes  to  give  sinews  to  the  diagonal  groins 
A  D  and  B  C,  if  he  wishes  to  have  the  triangles  A  B  E,  C  D  E,  A 
C  E  and  B  D  E  rest  upon  these  sinews  as  upon  permanent  center- 
ings and  if  this  vault  has  a  great  extent  —  then  one  perceives  that 
it  would  be  imprudent  to  draw  the  diagonal  arches  A  D  and  B  C, 
which  fulfil  so  important  a  function,  upon  a  curve  which  should  not 
be  at  least  a  semicircle. 

If  this  design  is  not  absolutely  contrary  to  good  construction,  it 
presents,  at  least,  difficulties  of  execution,  either  in  finding  the  points 
through  which  these  elliptical  curves  must  pass,  or  in  shaping  the 
voussoirs.  The  semicircular  arch  avoids  these  difficulties,  and  is 
incomparably  more  solid. 

The  first  bunders  of  purely  Gothic  vaults  do  something  very  simple 
in  appearance ;  instead  of  describing  the  semicircle  upon  the  diam- 
eter A  B  like  the  Romanesque  builders,  they  describe  it  upon  the 
diameter  A  D.  There  in  reality  is  their  only  innovation,  and  in 
adopting  it  they  suspect  nothing,  we  believe,  of  the  consequences  of 
an  act  apparently  so  natural.  But  in  the  builder's  art,  essentially 
logical,  and  based  on  reasoning,  the  least  deviation  from  the  estab- 
lished methods  rapidly  brings  nec&sary  and  rigorous  consequences, 
which  carry  us  far  from  the  point  of  departure. 

It  must  be  said  that  the  first  Gothic  builders,  repelled  not  unrea- 
sonably by  the  attempts  of  the  Romanesque  builders,  who  generally 
arrived  at  deceptive  conclusions,  were  not  alarmed  by  the  results  of 
their  new  methods,  but  on  the  contrary  sought,  with  rare  sagacity, 
to  profit  by  all  the  resources  offered  to  them  by  these  methods. 


50 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  POINTED  ARCH. 


The  Gothic  builders  had  not  discovered  the  broken  arch ;  it  ex- 
isted, as  we  have  seen  above,  in  the  constructions  whose  system  was 
perfectly  Romanesque. 

But  the  Gothic  architects  applied  the  broken  arch  to  a  system  of 
construction  of  which  they  were  indeed  the  true  and  only  inventors. 

There  were  broken  arches,  in  the  twelfth  century,  in  all  Western 
Europe.  There  is  no  Gothic  construction  of  that  epoch  except  in 
France  and  upon  a  small  part  of  its  present  territory,  whatever  they 
may  think  who  do  not  admit  that  anything  was  invented  among  us 
before  the  sixteenth  century. 

It  is  with  the  broken  arch  as  with  all  human  inventions,  which  are 
in  a  latent  state  long  before  receiving  their  true  application. 

Gunpowder  was  invented  in  the  thirteenth  century,  but  it  was  not 
really  used  until  the  fifteenth,  because  the  time  had  then  arrived 
when  that  agent  of  destruction  found  its  necessary  application. 

It  is  the  same  with  printing ;  at  all  times  men  had  made  stamps, 
but  the  idea  of  joining  letters  of  wood  or  of  metal  and  printing 
books  came  only  when  many  people  knew  how  to  read,  and  when 
instruction  and  knowledge  were  spreading  among  all  classes 
and  were  no  longer  the  privilege  of  a  few  monks  shut  up  in  their 
cloisters. 

Leonardo  da  Vinci,  and  perhaps  others  before  him,  had  foreseen 
that  steam  would  become  a  motive  power  very  easy  to  use ;  still,  men 
have  made  steam  engines  only  in  our  time,  because  the  moment  had 
arrived  when  that  agent,  by  its  power,  was  alone  capable  of  satisfy- 
ing the  needs  of  our  industry  and  our  activity. 

It  is,  then,  childish  to  say  thsft  since  the  broken  arch  belongs  to 
all  times,  the  builders  of  the  twelfth  century  can  lay  no  claim  to  its 
invention.  Certainly,  they  did  not  discover  it,  but  they  made  use 
of  the  resources  that  it  presents  by  virtue  of  its  properties,  in 
building;  and,  we  repeat,  it  is  only  in  France  —  that  is  to  say,  in 
the  royal  domain  and  several  neighboring  provinces  —  that  they 
knew  how  to  apply  it  in  the  art  of  building,  not  as  a  form  chosen 


CONSTRUCTION. 


51 


by  caprice,  but  as  a  means  of  extending  a  principle  whose  serious 
and  useful  consequences  we  are  about  to  make  known. 

If,  in  adopting  the  semicircular  arch  for  the  diagonals  of  vaults, 
the  builders  at  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century  had  wished  to  apply  it 
to  transverse  and  wall  arches,  they  would  in  the  beginning  have 
taken  a  step  backward,  since  their  predecessors  had  adopted  the 
pointed  arch,  in  consequence  of  unfortunate  experiments,  as  having 
less  thrust  than  the  semicircular  arch  ;  and  then  they  would  have 
found  themselves  greatly  embarrassed  about  closing  their  vaults. 

In  fact,  the  keys  of  transverse  arches  and  of  wall  arches  described 
upon  a  semicircle  would  be  found  so  much  below  the  level  of  the 
keys  of  the  ogival  arches  that  it  would  have  been  difficult  to  close 
up  the  filling  with  stones,  and  that,  had  they  closed  them,  the  ap- 
pearance of  these  vaults  would  have  been  very  disagreeable,  and 
their  thrust  considerable,  since  it  would  have  been  caused  by,  first, 
the  transverse  semicircular  arches,  and  then  by  the  enormous  weight 
that  the  stone  filling  would  have  added. 

On  the  contrary,  the  advantage  of  the  tierce-point  arch  adopted 
for  the  transverse  arches,  in  the  vaults  with  ogival  arches,  is  not 
only  that  it  has  a  very  slight  thrust  by  itself,  but  also  that  it  reduces 
a  great  part  of  the  weight  of  the  stone  filling,  or  rather,  renders  the 
pressure  of  that  weight  almost  vertical. 

In  fact,  let  Figure  23  be  the  plan  of  a  vault  with  ogival  arches; 
if  the  arches  A  D  and  C  B  are  semicircular,  and  if  the  transverse 
arches  A  B  and  CD  are  also  semicircular,  the  representation  in 
elevation  of  these  arches  will  give,  for  the  ogival  arches  the  semi- 
circle E  F  G,  and  for  the  transverse  arches  the  semicircle  E  II  I. 

In  this  case  the  stone  filling  of  the  triangle  COD  will  weigh  upon 
the  circular  arc  K  H  L ;  in  other  words,  about  three-fifths  of  the 
semicircle.  But  if  the  transverse  arches  are  drawn  according  to 
the  broken  arc  E  M  /,  the  stone  filling  of  the  triangle  COD  will 
weight  only  the  portion  of  that  arc  comprehended  between  D  M  R, 
the  points  P  and  R  being  given  by  a  tangent  S  T  parallel  to  the 


o2 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  POINTED  ARCH. 


tangent  VX,  and  the  portions  of  the  filling  included  between  E  R 
and  I  P  will  act  vertically. 

If  the  transverse  arches  are  semicircles,  the  oblique  weight  of 
each  triangle  of  filling-stones  will  be  0  N  Q  Q'  N';  while  if  they  are 


Fig.  23. 

drawn  in  tierce-point,  that  weight  will  be  only  0  N  Y  Y'  N'.  The 
experimental  method  sufficed  to  give  these  results,  and  at  the  end 
of  the  twelfth  century  the  builders  had  no  other.  It  is  our  work 
to  demonstrate  the  exactitude  of  that  method. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


We  have  just  said  that  the  point  /v,  where  the  weight  of  the  filling 
begins,  gives  an  arc  /  K,  which  is  about  one-fifth  of  the  semicircle. 
Now  (Fig.  24)  let  A  B  be  a  quarter  of  a  circle,  OCa  line  drawn 
at  45  degrees  dividing  this  quarter  of  a  circle  into  equal  parts ;  vous- 
soirs  placed  from  C  to  B,  if  not  supported  by  the  pressure  of  other 
voussoirs  placed  from  B  to  D,  will  sway,  according  to  the  laws  of 
gravity,  and  consequently  push  against  the  voussoirs  set  from  A  to  C. 

So  it  is  at  C  that  the  rupture  in  the  arch  must  take  place  ;  but 
account  must  be  taken  of  the  friction  of  the  surfaces  of  the  voussoir 


Fig.  24. 


beds,  and  of  the  adhesion  of  the  mortar.  This  friction  and  adhesion 
are  still  enough  to  maintain  the  voussoir  F  in  its  place  and  unite  it 
firmly  to  the  lower  voussoir  G. 

But  the  voussoir  F,  sharing  in  the  weight  of  the  voussoirs  set 
from  F  to  B,  carries  along  with  it  the  voussoir  G,  and  sometimes 
one  or  two  below  it  as  far  as  the  point  where  the  sections  of  the 
voussoirs  give  an  angle  of  35  degrees,  which  is  a  little  less  than  a 
fifth  of  the  semicircle. 

It  is  only  above  this  point  that  the  rupture  takes  place,  when  it  must 
occur  (see  Fig.  16)  and  consequently  that  the  actual  weight  begins. 

Whether  the  calculation  be  theoretical  or  practical,  it  is  certain 


54 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  POINTED  ARCH. 


that  the  builders  of  the  twelfth  century  counted  upon  some  time 
reducing  the  thrusts  of  the  vaults  enough  to  do  without  buttresses, 
and  to  maintain  the  vaults  upon  piers  of  moderate  thickness,  pro- 
vided they  were  weighted ;  for  they  did  not  think  at  first,  that  it  was 
necessary  to  oppose  flying-buttresses  to  the  thrust  that  they  believed 
themselves  to  have  almost  annulled,  whether  by  the  obliquity  of  the 
ogival  arches,  or  by  the  broken  curve  of  the  transverse  arches. 
Still,  experience  showed  them  that  they  were  mistaken.  The  result- 
ant of  the  oblique  thrusts  of  the  semicircular  ogival  arches,  added 
to  the  thrust  of  the  transverse  arches  in  tierce- 
point,  was  strong  enough  to  overturn  piers  which 
were  very  high  above  the  ground  and  were  only 
a  collection  of  uprights  without  breadth  of  base. 
So  they  set  flying-buttresses,  at  first  only  on  a 
level  with  the  points  of  junction  A  of  the  three 
arches  (Fig.  25)  and  dispensed  with  them  at  the 
height  of  the  points  B,  receiving  the  detached 
transverse  arches.  But  to  what  level  carry  the 
tops  of  these  flying-buttresses?  There  lay  a  diffi- 
culty so  much  the  greater,  since  theoretical  cal- 
culation gives  no  certainty  on  this  point,  and  long  experience  alone 
can  show  it.  As  far  as  we  can  judge  by  the  small  number  of  primi- 
tive flying  buttresses  preserved,  the  following  is  the  method  fol- 
lowed by  the  architects. 

Let  (Fig.  26)  A  B  C,  be  the  transverse  arch  separating  the  great 
vaults,  and  from  the  point  D,  the  centre  of  the  arch  A  B,  let  a  line 
D  E  be  drawn,  making  an  angle  of  35°  0'  with  the  horizon ;  let  F  G 
be  a  tangent  at  the  point  II ;  let  A  I  be  the  thickness  of  the  wall  or 
of  the  pier ;  then  the  tangent  F  G  will  meet  the  exterior  line  /  K  of 
the  pier  at  the  point  L. 

This  js  the  point  that  gives  the  intrados  of  the  highest  voussoirs  of 
the  flying-buttress. 

That  arch  is  then  a  quarter  of  a  circle  or  a  little  less,  its  centre 


CONSTRUCTION. 


55 


being  placed  upon  the  prolongation  of  the  line  K  I  or  a  little  inside 
of  that  line. 

The  load  M  N,  put  upon  the  flying-buttresses  is  fixed  arbitrarily 
at  first,  slight  at  the  summit  M,  strong  above  the  abutment  N,  which 


Fig.  26. 


Fig.  26b. 

gives  a  slightly  perceptible  inclination  to  the  line  N M  of  the  coping. 

Soon  certain  effects  manifested  themselves  in  these  constructions, 
because  of  the  thrust  of  the  vaults  and  in  spite  of  these  flying-but- 
tresses.   The  reason  is  this  :  behind  the  haunches  of  the  arches  and 


56 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  POINTED  ARCH. 


vaults  at  T  they  filled-in  with  masses  of  rubble-work,  as  much  to 
load  the  piers  as  to  maintain  the  haunches  of  the  arches  and  their 
filling.  These  masses  had,  in  fact,  the  advantage  of  hindering 
the  arches  from  breaking  at  the  point  H ;  but  the  whole  weight  of 
the  filling,  acting  from  K  to  0,  and  that  weight  being  considerable, 
there  resulted  a  slight  displacement  of  the  key-stone  B,  the  arch  not 
being  weighted  from  O  to  B,  and  in  consequence  a  change  of  form, 
as  indicated  (Figure  26b). 

This  change  of  form  produced  a  break  at  the  point  0',  the  upper 
level  of  the  masonry,  and  hence  a  very  oblique  thrust  0'  P,  above 
the  summit  of  the  flying-buttresses.  Therefore  the  equilibrium  was 
broken.  Accordingly,  it  was  necessary  to  rebuild  all  the  flying- 
buttresses  in  the  early  Gothic  monuments,  some  years  after  their 
construction ;  and  then  they  either  contented  themselves  with  raising 
the  summit  of  these  buttress- arches,  or  they  doubled  them  by  a 
second  arch  (see  " Arc-Boutant  "). 

We  do  not  gloss  over  the  false  moves  of  these  constructors ;  but, 
like  all  those  who  enter  a  new  field,  they  could  reach  the  goal  only 
after  groping.  It  is  easy  to-day,  when  we  have  monuments  built 
with  skill  and  care,  like  the  cathedral  of  Amiens  or  that  of  Rheims, 
to  criticise  the  attempts  of  the  architects  at  the  end  of  the  twelfth 
century.  But  at  that  epoch,  when  they  possessed  only  Romanesque 
monuments,  small  and  badly  enough  built,  when  the  exact  sciences 
were  scarcely  known,  the  new  task  that  the  architects  imposed  upon 
themselves  bristled  with  ever-recurring  difficulties,  which  they  could 
conquer  only  by  a  series  of  observations  made  with  the  greatest  care. 

These  are  the  observations  which  trained  the  skilful  constructors 
of  the  thirteenth  and  fourteenth  centuries. 


CHAPTER  V. 


Development  of  Principles. 

IT  must  be  said  to  the  credit  of  the  architects  of  the  twelfth 
century,  that,  having  adopted  a  new  and  unprecedented  system 
of  building,  they  pursued  its  development  with  a  rare  tenacity  and 
perseverance,  without  one  backward  glance,  despite  the  obstacles 
and  difficulties  which  arose  at  every  attempt.  Their  tenacity  is  all 
the  more  honorable,  since  they  could  not  foresee  in  adopting  the 
system  of  construction  of  the  Gothic  vaults,  the  results  which  came 
naturally  from  this  system.  They  acted  like  men  moved  by  strong 
conviction  ;  they  opened  for  their  successors  a  broad  and  sure  path 
in  which  Western  Europe  walked  without  hindrance  for  three 
centuries. 

Every  human  conception  is  tainted  with  some  error,  and  the  truly 
immutable,  in  everything,  is  still  to  be  found  ;  each  discovery  carries 
within  it,  at  its  birth,  the  cause  of  its  downfall,  and  man  has  no 
sooner  admitted  a  principle  than  he  recognizes  its  imperfection,  its 
flaws,  and  his  efforts  tend  to  combat  the  defects  inherent  in  this 
principle. 

Now,  of  all  human  conceptions,  the  construction  of  buildings  is 
one  of  those  which  are  confronted  by  the  most  serious  difficulties,  in 
that  they  are  of  opposite  natures,  some  material,  others  moral. 
In  fact,  the  constructor  must  not  only  seek  to  give  to  the  materials 
used  the  most  suitable  form,  according  to  their  own  nature,  but  he 


58 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  PRINCIPLES. 


must  group  them  in  such  a  way  as  to  resist  diverse  forces  and  foreign 
agencies.  But  in  addition  he  is  obliged  to  submit  himself  to  the  means 
at  his  disposal,  to  satisfy  moral  needs,  to  conform  to  the  tastes  and 
customs  of  those  for  whom  he  builds.  There  are  the  difficulties  of 
conception,  the  efforts  of  the  artist's  intellect;  there  are  also  the 
means  of  execution  from  which  the  builder  knows  not'  how  to  free 
himself. 

During  all  the  Romanesque  period  the  architects  had  made  vain 
attempts  to  reconcile  two  principles  seemingly  irreconcilable  ;  namely, 
the  tenuity  of  vertical  supports  or  the  economy  of  material  together 
with  the  use  of  the  Roman  vault  with  more  or  less  alteration.  Some 
provinces  had,  by  reason  of  influences  foreign  to  the  Western  spirit, 
adopted  the  pure  Byzantine  construction. 

At  Perigueux  they  built,  at  the  end  of  the  tenth  century,  the 
Church  of  Saint-Front,  and  from  that  isolated  example  rose  a  school. 
But  it  must  be  recognized  that  this  kind  of  building  was  foreign  to 
the  new  spirit  of  Western  nations,  and  the  constructors  of  Saint- 
Front  of  Pe'rigueux  erected  that  church  as  moulders  might  do,  re- 
producing forms  whose  structure  they  did  not  comprehend.  Thus, 
for  example,  the  pendentives  which  support  the  cupolas  of  Saint- 
Front  are  faced  by  means  of  courses  of  stones  set  in  corbels,  whose 
beds  are  not  normal  to  the  curve,  but  horizontal ;  if  these  penden- 
tives do  not  fall  inwards,  it  is  because  they  are  held  by  the  mortar, 
and  adhere  to  the  masonry  which  gives  them  their  concave  form. 

In  such  buildings  one  sees  only  an  attempt  to  reproduce  forms 
whose  geometrical  reason  the  builders  do  not  understand. 

Moreover,  we  see  complete  ignorance,  pitiable  expedients  applied 
as  makeshifts  at  the  moment  when  the  difficulty  presents  itself,  but 
no  foresight. 

A  great  number  of  Romanesque  constructions  indicate,  upon  the 
part  of  the  architects,  a  complete  want  of  foresight.  One  structure 
is  begun  in  the  vague  idea  of  ending  it  in  a  certain  fashion,  and 
stops  half-way,  because  the  builder  does  not  know  how  to  solve  the 


CONSTRUCTION. 


59 


problems  which  he  has  set  before  himself ;  another  can  be  finished 
only  by  the  use  of  means  clearly  foreign  to  its  first  conception.  We 
see  that  the  early  Romanesque  constructors  built  from  day  to  day, 
relying  upon  inspiration,  upon  chance,  upon  circumstances,  perhaps 
they  were  even  counting  upon  a  miracle  to  perfect  their  work. 

The  legends  attached  to  the  building  of  great  edifices  (even  if  the 
structures  were  not  there  to  show  us  the  embarrassment  of  the  archi- 
tects), are  full  of  dreams,  during  which  the  architects  see  some 
angel  or  some  saint,  taking  the  trouble  to  show  them  how  they  ought 
to  build  their  vaults,  or  maintain  their  pillars ;  which  did  not  always 
prevent  these  monuments  from  collapsing  soon  after  their  comple- 
tion, for  faith  is  not  sufficient  for  building. 

Without,  perhaps,  being  less  devout,  the  architects  at  the  end  of 
the  twelfth  century  —  chiefly,  if  not  entirely,  laymen  —  thought  it  pru- 
dent in  the  matter  of  building,  not  to  wait  for  the  intervention  of  an 
angel  or  a  saint  in  order  to  erect  an  edifice.  Moreover  (a  curious 
and  noteworthy  fact),  the  monkish  chronicles,  legends  and  histories 
which  are  so  prodigal  of  praises  of  monuments  raised  during  the 
Romanesque  period,  and  which  enlarge  so  complacently  upon 
the  beauty  of  their  structure,  their  grandeur  and  their  decorations, 
although  many  of  these  monuments  are  only  wretched  buildings  of 
rough  stones,  badly  designed  and  worse  executed,  become  abruptly 
silent  at  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century,  when  architecture  passes 
from  the  cloisters  into  the  hands  of  the  laity.  Perchance  there  is  a 
word  about  the  edifice  —  a  phrase,  dry  and  laconic  ;  but  as  to  the 
masters  of  the  work,  nothing. 

Is  it  credible,  for  example,  that,  in  the  voluminous  records  of  the 
church  of  Notre  Dame  at  Paris  which  contains  documents  dating 
back  to  the  twelfth  century,  not  a  single  word  is  said  about  the  con- 
struction of  the  present  cathedral  ? 

Laborious  and  intelligent  artists,  sprung  from  the  people,  you, 
who  have  been  the  first  to  free  yourselves  from  worn-out  tradi- 
tions ;  who  have  entered  freely  into  practical  science ;  who  have 


GO 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  PRINCIPLES. 


formed  that  army  of  skilful  workmen  soon  to  spread  over  the  whole 
surface  of  the  Western  continent;  who  have  opened  the  way  for 
progress,  for  bold  innovations  ;  who  in  short,  belong,  by  so  many 
titles  to  modern  civilization  ;  who  were  the  first  to  possess  its  spirit 
of  research,  its  craving  for  knowledge  ;  if  your  contemporaries  have 
let  your  names  be  forgotten  :  if,  despising  the  efforts  by  which  they 
profit,  those  who  claim  to  direct  the  arts  of  our  time  attempt  to  dis- 
parage your  works,  then,  at  least,  among  so  much  injustice  past  and 
present,  let  our  voice  be  raised  to  vindicate  the  place  which  belongs 
to  you,  and  which  your  modesty  has  made  you  lose.  If,  less 
engrossed  with  your  labors,  you  had,  like  your  confreres  in  Italy, 
boasted  of  your  knowledge  and  glorified  your  own  genius,  we  should 
not  to-day  be  forced  to  search  your  works  in  order  to  bring  to  light 
the  profound  experience  that  you  had  acquired,  the  practical  means 
that  you  had  so  judiciously  calculated,  and  above  all  to  defend  you 
against  those  who  are  incapable  of  understanding  that  genius  can  be 
developed  in  the  shade,  —  that  by  its  very  nature  it  seeks  silence  and 
obscurity;  —  against  the  many  who  judge  on  the  strength  of  sentences 
pronounced  by  passion,  or  self-interest,  and  not  after  their  own  ex- 
amination. 

It  must,  however,  be  said  that  to-day,  it  is  no  longer  permissible  to 
decide  questions  of  history  touching  the  arts,  politics,  or  letters,  by 
simple  affirmations  or  negations. 

And  the  retrograde  minds  are  those  that  wish  to  judge  these 
questions,  in  relying  upon  the  antique  methods  or  upon  their  own 
partiality.  No  sensible  artist  dares  to  maintain  that  we  ought  to 
build  our  churches  and  houses  as  they  did  in  the  twelfth  or  thir- 
teenth century,  but  no  just  mind  would  be  unable  to  comprehend 
that  the  experience  gained  by  the  masters  of  that  time  can  be  more 
useful  to  us,  according  as  they  made  greater  innovations.  The 
most  difficult  obstacle  for  us  to  get  rid  of,  the  real,  vital  obstacle,  is, 
we  must  admit,  intellectual  laziness ;  each  man  wishes  to  know  with- 
out the  trouble  of  learning,  and  each  man  pretends  to  judge  without 


CONSTRUCTION. 


61 


knowing  the  proofs  of  the  case ;  and  the  truest,  best  written,  and 
most  useful  principles  will  be  set  aside  among  obsolete  relics, 
because  some  man  of  wit  has  derided  them,  and  because  the  listening 
crowd  is  too  happy  to  applaud  a  criticism  which  saves  them  the 
trouble  of  learning.  A  sad  glory,  after  all,  that  of  prolonging 
the  duration  of  obscurity ;  it  can  bring  no  profit  to  its  possessor  in  a 
century  which  boasts  of  casting  light  upon  all  things  ;  whose  activity 
is  so  great  that,  being  unable  to  find  in  the  present  sufficient  food 
for  its  intellectual  needs,  it  wishes  again  to  unfold  the  past  before 
itself. 

If  our  French  architecture  of  the  Renaissance  is  superior,  in  the 
eyes  of  persons  who  have  carefully  studied  it  and  have  brought  into 
that  study  an  enlightened  criticism,  to  the  Italian  architecture  of  the 
fifteenth  and  sixteenth  centuries,  does  not  this  come  from  the  fact 
that  our  Gothic  schools,  despite  the  abuses  of  later  times  had  long 
since  trained  skilful  professionals  and  intelligent  workmen,  knowing 
how  to  submit  form  to  reason ;  and  from  the  fact  that  these  schools 
were  specially  adapted  to  liberate  the  minds  of  the  architects  and 
workmen,  and  to  familiarize  them  with  the  numerous  difficulties 
which  surround  the  builders  ? 

We  know  that  this  language  is  unintelligible  to  those  who  judge 
the  different  forms  of  our  art  after  their  own  sentiments  or  preju- 
dices ;  and  therefore,  it  is  not  to  those  people  that  we  address  our- 
selves, but  to  those  architects  who  have  long  been  familiar  with  the 
resources  and  difficulties  presented  in  the  practice  of  our  art. 
Indeed,  for  artists,  the  study  of  an  art  where  everything  is  foreseen 
and  calculated,  which  even  sins  by  an  excess  of  research  and  of 
practical  means,  in  which  matter  is  both  superior  to  form  and  sub- 
missive to  principle,  cannot  fail  to  develop  the  mind  and  prepare  it 
for  the  innovations  that  our  time  demands. 

It  would  be  a  digression  from  our  subject  to  explain  how,  at  the 
end  of  the  twelfth  century,  there  was  formed  a  powerful  lay  school 
of  builders;  how  that  school,  protected  by  the  Episcopate,  which 


62  DEVELOPMENT  OF  PRINCIPLES. 

wished  to  lessen  the  importance  of  religious  orders,  and  possessing 
the  sympathies  of  the  people  whence  it  came  and  whose  spirit  of 
research  and  progress  it  reflected  ;  and  having  been  welcomed  by 
secular  feudalism,  which  did  not  find  among  the  monks  all  the 
elements  which  it  needed  for  building  its  dwellings:  how  that  school, 
we  repeat,  profiting  by  these  favorable  circumstances,  gained  a  strong 
foothold,  and,  consequently,  great  independence.  It  will  suffice  us 
to  indicate  that  state  of  things,  new  in  the  history  of  the  arts,  to 
make  its  consequences  appreciated. 

We  have  previously  seen  where  the  builders  had  arrived  about 
1160,  and  how  they  had  been  led  to  modify  successively  the  Roman- 
esque vault,  which  was  only  a  degraded  condition  of  the  Roman 
vault,  and  to  invent  the  Gothic  vault  proper.  This  great  step 
taken,  there  still  remained  much  to  be  done.  The  first  result 
of  that  innovation  was  to  force  the  builders  to  design  their  edifices, 
beginning  at  the  vault,  and  hence  to  leave  nothing  to  chance,  as  had 
happened  only  too  often  with  their  predecessors.  This  method, 
strange  in  appearance,  which  consisted  in  deriving  the  ground-plan 
from  the  design  of  the  vault,  is  eminently  rational.  What  do  we 
wish  when  we  build  a  vaulted  edifice?  To  cover  a  surface.  What 
is  the  end  that  we  propose  to  attain?  To  fix  vaults  upon  points  of 
support.  What  is  the  principal  object?  The  vault.  The  points 
of  support  are  only  means. 

The  Roman  builders  had  already  been  led  to  derive  the  plan  of 
their  vaulted  edifices  from  the  form  and  extent  of  these  same  vaults; 
but  this  principle  was  only  a  general  principle,  and,  from  the  exami- 
nation of  a  ground-plan  of  the  later  Roman  empire,  one  could  not 
always  conclude  that  such  a  part  was  vaulted  in  cradle-form,  in 
groins  or  spherically,  since  each  of  these  vaults  might  be  in  many 
cases,  placed  indifferently  over  these  ground-plans. 

It  is  no  longer  thus  in  the  twelfth  century ;  not  only  does  the  hori- 
zontal plan  indicate  the  number  and  form  of  the  vaults,  but  also  their 
different  members,  transverse  arches,  wall-arches  and  diagonal  arches, 


CONSTRUCTION. 


63 


and  these  members  govern,  in  their  turn,  the  arrangement  of  the 
vertical  supports,  their  relative  height  and  their  diameter.  Hence 
it  should  be  concluded  that,  in  order  to  draw  definitely  a  ground- 
plan,  and  to  proceed  to  its  execution,  it  is  necessary,  first  of  all,  to 
make  the  drawing  of  the  vaults,  of  their  slopes  and  of  their  abut- 
ments, and  to  ascertain  exactly  the  dimensions  and  shapes  of  the 
stones  of  the  various  arches.  The  first  Gothic  builders  acquainted 
themselves  so  promptly  with  that  method  of  taking  every  construc- 
tion at  the  top  in  order  to  arrive  successively  at  the  drawing  of  the 
bases,  that  they  adopted  it  even  in  the  edifices  not  vaulted,  but  hav- 
ing plank  or  timber  ceilings,  and  they  found  themselves  none  the 
worse  off,  as  we  shall  see  later  on. 

The  first  condition  in  order  to  arrange  the  plan  of  an  edifice,  at 
the  end  of  the  twelfth  century,  was  to  know  whether  it  was  to  be 
vaulted,  and  in  what  way.  It  is  necessary,  then,  as  soon  as  the 
number  and  directions  of  the  arches  of  these  vaults  are  known,  to 
obtain  the  drawing  of  the  abutments  upon  the  capitals,  for  it  will  be 
the  drawing  of  these  abutments  which  will  give  the  shape  and  dimen- 
sions of  the  abacus  and  capitals,  as  well  as  the  number,  size  and 
position  of  the  vertical  supports. 

Let  us  suppose,  then  (Fig.  27),  a  hall  which  is  to  be  vaulted,  hav- 
A  ing  a  length  of  twelve  metres  inside  the 
building,  and  divided  into  compartments 
of  six  metres  from  axis  to  axis, 
■g  Let  us  adopt  the  system  of  diagonal 
arched  vaults  crossed  by  a  transverse 
arch,  after  the  method  of  the  builders 
at  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century.  We 
must  trace  the  lower  bed  of  the  abut- 
ments of  the  arches  falling  on  A  and  B, 
and  find  out  the  size  of  the  voussoirs.  We  admit  that  these  vous- 
soirs,  for  a  hall  of  such  extent,  must  have  0.40  centimetres  of  width 
anj  height ;  we  recognize  that  at  that  epoch  the  different  arches  of 


64 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  PRINCIPLES. 


a  vault  are  almost  always  formed  of  voussoirs  alike  in  dimensions 
and  form.  We  recognize  again  that,  since  the  wall-arches  begin 
much  higher  up  than  the  transverse  and  the  diagonal  arches,  the 
slender  columns  serving  to  support  them  often  rise  above  the  level 
of  the  abutments  of  the  diagonal  and  transverse  arches  ;  that,  in 
outlining  the  bed  of  the  abutments  of  the  transverse  and  diagonal 
arches,  we  ought  to  take  account  of  the  elevation  of  the  column 
supporting  the  wall-arch,  just  as  we  would  take  account  of  the  wall- 
arch  itself. 

Let  Figure  28  be  the  detail  of  the  horizontal  drawing  of  the 
terminus  of  the  arches  at  B;  from  this  point  there  rise  only  one 
transverse  arch  and  two  wall-arches.  The  latter  are  the  command- 
ing arches,  for  the  transverse  arch  diverges  from  these  wall-arches 
at  their  origin.  Let  A  B  be  the  surface  of  the  wall;  the  wall-arch 
has  a  projection,  usually,  half  as  thick  as  the  pointed  arch  or  the 
transverse  arch  when  these  two  arches  have  a  similar  section,  and 
half  as  thick  as  the  diagonal  arch  when  that  and  the  transverse  arch 
have  different  sections.  In  the  present  case,  the  wall-arch  has  then 
0.20  centimetres  of  projection  from  the  surface  of  the  wall.  Through 
C  we  draw  a  line  parallel  to  A  B.  The  axis  of  the  transverse  arch 
being  D  E,  and  the  points  F  and  G  being  taken  at  0.20  centimetres 
each  from  that  axis,  we  draw  the  two  parallels  F  I  and  G  K,  which 
gives  us  the  thickness  of  the  transverse  arch.  From  F  to  measur- 
ing 0.40  centimetres,  we  have  its  height  between  the  intrados  and 
extrados ;  we  can  then  in  the  square  F  I'  K'  G  trace  the  proper 
contour;  it  is  the  lower  bed  of  the  abutment. 

Either  the  column  supporting  the  wall-arch  rises  above  the  level  of 
this  bed,  as  indicated  in  L,  or  the  wall-arch,  as  sometimes  happens 
as  in  the  Church  of  Nesle,  Oise,  takes  its  start  upon  the  capital 
supporting  the  transverse  arch ;  and  then,  from  the  axis  D  E, 
measuring  off  0.40  centimetres  on  the  line  A  B,  which  gives  us  the 
point  M,  we  inscribe  the  contour  of  the  wall-arch  in  the  parallelogram 
EON  M.    It  is  understood  that  this  wall-arch  should  enter  the 


CONSTRUCTION. 


65 


wall  for  several  centimetres.  The  lower  bed  of  the  abutment  being 
thus  found,  the  abacus  of  the  capital  must  be  drawn,  and  its  contour 
must  form  a  projection  around  the  ends  of  the  arches.  If  the  wall- 
arch  is  resting  upon  a  column  rising  to  its  abutment,  as  represented 
in  L,  the  abacus  P  R  S  turns  squarely  about  and  ceases  at  the 
column  L  of  the  wall-arch.  If,  on  the  contrary,  the  contour  of  the 
wall-arch  descends  as  far  as  the  capital  of  the  transverse  arch 
the  abacus  takes  upon  the  horizontal  plan,  the  form  P  T  V  X. 

In  order  to  draw  the  column  under  the  capital,  in  the  first  case,  from 
the  vertex  of  the  right  angle  R  of  the  abacus  we  draw  a  line  at  45 
degrees ;  that  line  meets  the  axis  D  E  in  a  point  0,  which  is  the 
centre  of  the  column,  to  which  we  give  a  diameter  such  that  the  pro- 
jection of  the  abacus  over  the  surface  of  that  column  shall  be  greater 

than  the  radius  of  the  column. 
There  remains  then,  between  the 
column  and  the  surface  A  B  of 
the  wall,  a  vacant  place  that  we 
fill  with  a  pilaster  hidden  by  that 
column  and  the  pillar  of  the 
wall-arch. 

In  order  to  outline  the  column 
under  the  capital,  in  the  second 
case,  we  take  a  centre  Y  upon  the 
axis  D  E,  in  such  a  way  that  the 
projection  of  the  abacus  over 
the  surface  of  the  column  shall 
be  greater  than  its  radius  ;  then 
the  capital  forms  a  corbel  or 
bracket,  and  is  found  to  be  broader  under  the  wall-arch  than 
under  the  face  of  the  transverse  arch. 

Let  us  take  now,  on  Figure  27,  the  beginning  A  of  two  wall- 
arches,  two  pointed  arches  and  one  transverse  arch.  Let  A  B 
(Fig.  286),  be  the  surface  of  the  wall,  C  D  the  directrix  of  the 


Fig.  28, 


0(3 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  PRINCIPLES. 


transverse  arch,  D  E  the  directrix  of  the  diagonal  arch ;  we  out- 
line the  projection  of  the  wall-arch  as  above.  The  diagonal  arches 
govern  the  transverse  arch.  From  each  side  of  the  line  D  E  we 
measure  off  0.20  centimetres,  and  draw  the  two  parallels  F  G  and 
H  I  which  give  us  the  width  of  the  diagonal  arch.  From  the  point 
H,  the  meeting  of  the  line  HI  with  the  axis  CD  upon  that  line 
HI,  we  take  0.45  centimetres,  that  is  to  say,  a  little  more  than  the 
height  of  the  voussoirs  of  the  diagonal  arch,  and  we  draw  the  per- 
pendicular /  G,  which  gives  us  the  face  of  the  diagonal  arch. 

In  the  parallelogram  F  G  I H  we  outline  the  appropriate  contour. 

From  the  two  sides  of  the  axis  CD,  measuring  off  in  the  same 
way  0.20  centimetres,  we  draw  the  two  parallels  K  L  and  M  N. 

From  the  point  H,  measuring  off  0.40  centimetres  upon  the  axis 
C  D  from  H  to  C ,  we  draw  a  perpendicular  L  N  to  that  axis,  which 
gives  us  the  face  of  the  transverse  arch,  and  then  we  outline  its 
contour. 

At  P,  we  imagine  that  the  column  bearing  the  wall-arch  passes 
above  the  beginning  of  the  diagonal  and  transverse  arches  ;  at  R,  we 
suppose  that  the  contour  of  the  wall-arch  has  fallen  vertically  upon 
the  abacus  of  the  capital.  In  order  to  draw  this  wall-arch  in  this 
latter  case,  we  take  upon  the  line  A  B,  from  the  point  M  to  Q,  0.40 
centimetres,  and  from  this  point  Q,  erecting  a  perpendicular  upon  the 
line  A  B,  we  have  the  parallelogram,  including  the  contour  of 
the  wall-arch.  The  abaci  of  the  capitals  are  drawn  parallel  to  the 
faces  of  the  arches,  as  our  figure  shows. 

From  the  vertices  G  and  L,  drawing  lines  at  an  angle  of  45°,  we 
meet  the  axis  D  E  at  0,  which  is  the  centre  of  the  pillar  carrying 
the  diagonal  arches,  and  the  axis  C  D  at  S,  which  is  the  centre  of  the 
column  of  the  transverse  arch.  We  outline  these  columns  conform- 
ably to  the  rule  previously  established. 

Behind  these  detached  columns,  we  suppose  the  location  of  the 
pilasters  that  reinforce  the  piers ;  then  the  wall-arch  R  falls  upon  a 
face  of  these  pilasters  carrying  capitals  like  the  columns. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


67 


Often  the  wall-arches  did  not  descend  to  the  abacus  of  the  capitals 
of  the  great  arches,  and  also  had  no  pillar  supporting  them  from  the 
floor.  They  started  upon  a  pillar  placed  on  the  lateral  projection  of 
the  abacus,  as  Figure  29  indicates,  both  in  horizontal  section  and  in 
perspective  elevation.  Then  the  abaci  of  the  lateral  pillars  A  were 
cut  in  such  a  way  that  their  oblique  face  CD,  perpendicular  to  the 


£.  CMCi/tiMfOf 


Fig.  286.  Fig.  29. 

directrix  B  of  the  pointed  arches,  was  divided  into  two  equal  parts 
by  that  directrix. 

Still,  it  must  be  recognized  that  the  builders  only  little  by  little 
decided  to  indicate  the  form,  direction  and  members  of  the  vault 
upon  the  ground-plan.  They  kept  for  some  time  the  monocylindrical 
piers  on  the  ground-floor,  while  outlining  the  plan  governed  by  the 
vaults  only,  upon  the  abaci  of  the  capitals  of  these  piers. 


68 


DEVELOPMENT  OE  PRINCIPLES. 


What  occupied  them  after  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century  was  the 
rigid  observance  of  a  principle  which  had  hitherto  been  universally 
admitted.  This  principle  was  that  of  the  equilibrium  of  forces,  sub- 
stituted for  the  principle  of  inert  stability,  which  was  so  well  practised 
by  the  Romans,  and  which  the  Romanesque  builders  had  vainly  tried 
to  preserve  in  their  large,  vaulted  edifices,  composed  of  several  naves. 

Recognizing  the  impossibility  of  giving  to  the  detached  piers  an 
impost  sufficient  to  resist  the  thrust  of  the  vaults,  the  builders  of  the 
twelfth  century  took  a  new  course :  they  sought  their  means  of  re- 
sistance elsewhere.  They  were  no  longer  willing  to  admit  the 
detached  pillars,  except  as  supports  maintained  upright,  not  by  their 
own  base,  but  by  the  laws  of  equilibrium.  It  was  of  importance, 
then,  only  that  they  should  have  a  force  sufficient  to  resist  a  vertical 
pressure. 

There  are  always,  even  when  a  principle  is  admitted  for  a  certain 
time  during  its  application,  blind  attempts ;  one  never  frees  himself 
from  traditions  in  one  day. 

In  inventing  the  diagonal-arch  vaults  on  a  square  foundation  and 
crossed  by  a  transverse  arch,  the  builders  still  sought  points  spaced 
off  between  each  pair  of  compartments,  more  stable  at  the  height  of 
the  principal  pressures. 

In  fact,  in  Figure  27,  the  points  A  receive  the  weight  and  main- 
tain the  thrust  of  one  transverse  and  two  diagonal  arches,  while  the 
points  B  receive  the  weight  and  maintain  the  pressures  only  of  one 
transverse  arch.  This  system  of  vault-building,  adopted  during  the 
second  half  of  the  twelfth  century,  induced  the  builders  to  erect 
under  the  points  A  piers  stronger  than  those  under  the  points  B, 
and  then  to  give  to  the  voussoirs  of  the  principal  transverse  arches 
falling  on  A  a  width  and  thickness  greater  than  those  given  to  the 
voussoirs  of  the  diagonal  and  secondary  transverse  arches ;  for  in 
the  early  Gothic  vaults,  it  is  to  be  remarked,  as  we  have  already 
said,  that  the  voussoirs  of  all  the  arches  generally  present  the  same 
section. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


69 


The  arch  in  tierce-point  was  so  well  regulated  by  the  necessity 
of  diminishing  the  thrust,  or  resisting  the  weight,  that  we  see  in 
the  early  Gothic  buildings,  the  broken  arch  uniformly  adopted  for 
the  transverse  arches  and  the  lower  archivolts,  while  the  semicircular 
arch  is  kept  for  the  bays  of  windows,  for  the  arcades  of  galleries, 
and  even  for  the  wall- arches,  which1*  carry  only  a  slight  weight  or 
present  only  a  small  opening. 

In  the  Cathedral  of  Noyon,  whose  primitive  vaults  must  have  been 
raised  about  1160,1  the  wall-arches  which  belong  to  that  period  are 
semicircular.  In  the  Cathedral  of  Sens,  built  about  this  same  time, 
the  wall-arches  were  semicircular,2  while  the  archivolts  and  trans- 
verse arches  are  in  tierce-point. 

It  is  the  same  with  the  choir  of  the  abbey  church  of  Vezelay,  built 
at  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century;  the  wall-arches  are  semicircular. 

In  these  edifices,  particularly  at  Sens,  the  piers,  under  the  com- 
bined pressure  and  weight  of  the  diagonal  and  transverse  arches 
present  a  very  considerable  horizontal  section,  formed  of  clusters  of 
engaged  pillars ;  while  under  the  weight  of  the  transverse  arches 
alone  the  j)iers  are  composed  of  monocylindrical  twin  columns,  placed 
perpendicular  to  the  axis  of  the  nave. 

At  Noyon  the  intermediate  transverse  arches,  before  the  re- 
building of  the  vaults,  rested  upon  a  single  column.  But  the  nave 
of  the  cathedral  of  Sens  is  much  larger  than  that  of  the  cathedral  at 
Noyon ;  and  the  building  is  at  all  points  stronger.  That  arrange- 
ment of  vaults  having  two  divisions  and  distributing  the  principal 
pressures  and  weights  upon  pairs  of  piers,  had  originally  allowed 
the  builders  to  place  flying-buttresses  only  at  the  height  of  the  prin- 
cipal piers. 

It  is  probable  that  in  the  Cathedral  of  Sens,  this  was  formerly  the 
plan  adopted ;  perhaps  it  was  the  same  in  the  Cathedral  at  Noyon 

1  These  vaults  were  rebuilt  in  the  thirteenth  century,  over  the  great  nave,  only 
the  original  wall-arches  being  left  in  place. 

2  These  wall-arches  were  raised  at  the  end  of  the  thirteenth  century,  as  one  can 
still  see  by  the  divisions  of  the  apse. 


70 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  PRINCIPLES. 


as  in  that  of  Paris;  but  these  edifices  having  been  more  or  less 
restored  in  the  thirteenth  century,  it  is  impossible  to  affirm  anything 
in  that  respect.  What  we  may  be  certain  of,  is,  that  at  the  end  of 
twelfth  century,  the  builders  had  adopted  the  flying-buttress  in 
despair,  since  they  were  seeking  to  avoid  it  as  far  as  possible,  and 
since  they  distrusted  this  means  whose  advantages  and  power  they 
were  not  yet  able  to  appreciate ;  and  that  they  regarded  it  only  as 
an  auxiliary,  a  last  resort,  often  an  afterthought,  and  when  they  had 
learned  that  they  could  not  do  without  it.  The  best  proof  that  we 
can  give  is  that  some  years  later  the  architects,  having  finally  sub- 
mitted, in  the  edifices  with  three  naves,  their  system  of  vaults  to  the 
law  of  equilibrium,  opposed  flying-buttresses  to  the  thrust  of  vaults 
which  had  possessed  them  only  partially  or  not  at  all,  and  did  away 
with  the  flying-buttresses  of  the  twelfth  century,  probably  misplaced, 
or  insufficient,  in  order  to  replace  them  by  new  and  well  arranged 
buttresses,  as  regards  the  resistance  or  the  pressure. 

We  must,  before  going  further,  inform  our  readers  concerning 
the  processes  of  construction,  and  the  nature  and  dimensions  of  the 
materials  employed.  We  have  seen,  at  the  beginning  of  this  article, 
how  the  early  Romanesque  constructors  built  their  masonry,  com- 
posed of  concrete,  enclosed  between  the  facings  of  cutstone,  or  of 
dressed  rubble. 

The  builders  of  the  twelfth  century  added  some  modification  to 
these  first  methods.  Building  edifices  more  vast  in  extent  and  taller 
than  those  of  the  Romanesque  period,  and  seeking  to  diminish  the 
thickness  of  the  interior  supports  and  of  the  walls,  it  was  necessary 
for  them,  on  the  one  hand,  to  find  a  mode  of  construction  more  homo- 
geneous and  capable  of  resistance ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  to  avoid, 
in  monuments  already  of  great  height,  the  expense  of  labor  which 
the  carrying  up  of  materials  of  great  size  would  have  occasioned. 
Henceforth  they  gave  up  the  use  of  large  facing-stones  (except  in 
particular  instances  or  in  some  exceptional  edifices)  and  preferred  to 
build  with  small  facing-stones,  resembling  rubble  rather  than  the 


CONSTRUCTION. 


71 


cut-stone.  As  far  as  possible,  the  greater  part  of  the  stones  then  used 
to  form  facings  or  voussoirs  of  archivolts,  transverse  and  pointed 
arches,  are  in  pieces  small  enough  to  be  carried  upon  a  man's  back, 
and  laid  by  a  mason  like  our  ordinary  stones.    The  method  once 

adopted,  this  little  facing 
is  very  well  made,  very 
judiciously  combined;  it 
is  a  middle  course  be- 
tween the  Roman  con- 
struction in  large  facing- 
stones,  and  that  of 
rough  stones  included 
between  brick  or  stone 
walls.  In  adopting  the 
small  facing-stones  in 
large  edifices,  the  build- 
ers of  the  twelfth  cen- 
tury had  too  much  sense 
to  lay  these  low  and 
shallow  courses  with 
free  joints,  like  certain 
Romanesque  construc- 
tions; on  the  contrary 
they  separated  these 
courses  by  beds  and 
joints  of  thick  mortar 
(from  0.01  to  0.02  c),  in 
order  that  these  beds  might  form  a  link  between  the  interior  masonry 
and  the  facing.  This  method  was  the  Roman  method,  and  it  is  a 
good  one. 

The  reader  will  understand,  in  fact,  that  if  (Fig.  30)  these  courses  are 
laid  without  mortar  in  front  of  a  masonry  of  rubble  and  mortar,  the 
rubblework  having  settled  because  of  the  drying  of  the  mortar 


Fig.  30. 


Fig.  306. 


72 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  PRINCIPLES. 


under  the  pressure,  and  the  courses  of  stones,  set  directly  one  upon 
another,  being  unable  to  diminish  in  volume,  a  vertical  rupture  A  B, 
will  take  place  behind  the  facing,  which  will  not  be  long  in  falling. 
But  if  (Fig.  30  b)  we  have  taken  care  to  leave  between  the  courses 
of  stones  a  thick  bed  of  mortar,  not  only  will  this  bed,  made  fast  to 
the  masonry,  hold  the  stone-facings,  but  it  will  also  permit  the  facing 
to  undergo  a  settlement  equivalent  to  that  of  the  interior  mass. 

The  early  Romanesque  builders,  especially  in  countries  where  one 
can  procure  large  hard  stones,  as  in  Burgundy,  Franehe-Comte,  and 
Alsace,  upon  the  Saone,  and  the  Rhone,  did  not  fail  to  mimic  the 
Roman  facing,  by  setting  broad,  high  squares  of  flagging,  so  to 
speak,  without  mortar,  in  front  of  the  filling  :  but  they  paid  dearly 
for  this  desire  to  make  their  constructions  appear  other  than  thev 
were.  There  took  place  in  the  majority  of  these  edifices,  ruptures 
between  the  facing  and  the  filling,  longitudinal  crevices  which 
caused  in  nearly  all  of  them  serious  disorders  at  least,  and  often 
utter  ruin.  These  effects  were  the  more  frequent  and  dangerous,  as 
the  edifices  were  more  elevated.  Better  advised,  and  taught  by  ex- 
perience, the  architects  of  the  twelfth  century,  as  much  for  reasons 
of  economy  and  facility  of  execution,  as  to  avoid  this  want  of  homo- 
geneity between  the  facings  and  the  filling,  adopted  the  construction 
in  courses  very  shallow  and  separated  by  thick  beds  of  mortar. 
These  beds  had  not  only  the  advantage  of  settling  down  and  bind- 
ing the  facings  to  the  filling  ;  but  being  made  of  mortar  of  a  fat  lime 
they  became  hard  gradually,  and,  while  waiting  for  perfect  solidifi- 
cation, the  structures  had  time  to  settle  down,  undergoing  even 
certain  changes  of  form,  without  occasioning  any  breaks  in  the 
masonry. 

The  buildings  raised  from  1140  to  1200,  in  Ue-de-France,  Beauvais, 
Soissons,  Picardy,  Champagne  and  Normandy,  are  built  with  facings 
surprisingly  small ;  for  already  these  edifices  are  vast,  of  compli- 
cated and  yet  very  light  structure.  To  employ  cut  ashlar  in  such 
constructions  as  the  principal  material  was  highly  audacious  ;  to 


CONSTRUCTION. 


71] 


succeed  was  the  work  of  very  skilful  men.  If  one  examines  with 
care  the  facing  of  the  portions  belonging  to  the  twelfth  century  in 
the  Cathedrals  of  Noyon,  Senlis  and  of  a  great  number  of  churches 
in  the  departments  of  the  Oise,  the  Seine,  the  Seine-et-Oise,  of  the 
Seine-et-Marne,  of  the  Marne,  of  Seine  inferieur,  etc.,  he  is  astonished 
that  builders  have  dared  to  raise  monuments  so  light  and  of  so  great 
height,  with  means  that  seem  so  feeble ;  and  yet  the  stability  of  these 
edifices  has  long  since  been  assured,  and  if  some  among  them  have 
undergone  sensible  alterations,  that  is  due  almost  always  to  particu- 
lar accidents,  such  as  fires,  want  of  repairs,  or  subsequent  overloading. 

Of  all  these  monuments,  one  of  the  most  perfect,  and  the  best 
preserved  is  the  Cathedral  of  Noyon,  built  from  1150  to  1190. 
Except  the  smaller  pillars,  the  large  capitals,  the  abutments,  and 
some  exceptional  portions,  the  whole  building  is  composed  only  of 
rubble  having  little  resistance. 

One  will  obtain  an  idea  of  this  construction  from  our  Figure  31, 
which  gives  a  part  of  the  two  interior  divisions  of  the  nave. 

The  isolated  pillars  of  the  gallery  above  the  aisle,  those  of  the 
little  triforium  above,  and  those  separating  the  high  windows  are 
monoliths  of  hard  stone  set  against  the  stratum. 

As  to  the  small  triple  columns  A,  which  before  the  rebuilding  of 
the  vaults  in  the  thirteenth  century,  received  the  transverse  arch  at 
the  intersection  of  the  diagonal  and  wall  arches,  they  are  composed 
of  large  pieces,  held  contrary  to  the  cleavage,  at  intervals,  by 
cramps  in  the  form  of  a  T. 

But  these  pillars  were  set  up  after  the  structure  had  entirely 
settled  down,  and  they  are  really  only  a  decoration,  and  support 
nothing;  the  course  of  the  capital  and  the  abutment,  whose  extrem- 
ities are  held  fast  in  the  masonry,  being  sufficient  to  sustain  the 
voussoirs  of  the  transverse  arch. 

We  have  indicated  in  B,  the  starting-point  of  the  old  diagonal 
arches  of  the  great  vaults,  and  in  C,  the  wall-arch  behind  the 
diagonal  arches. 


Fig  3  1, 


CONSTRUCTION. 


73 


It  will  be  remarked  that,  here,  as  in  the  majority  of  the  churches 
built  at  that  period,  in  the  provinces  bordering  on  Ile-de-France, 
and  notably,  in  the  Beauvoisis,  the  piers  which  support  the  extremi- 
ties of  the  diagonal  and  transverse  arches  are  much  heavier  than 
those  which  support  only  the  transverse  arch. 

In  other  words  (see  the  plan),  the  piers  D,  are  composed  of  a 
cluster  of  pillars,  while  the  intermediate  piers  E,  are  only  monocy- 
lindrical  on  the  ground-floor,  surmounted  by  the  cluster  of  pillars  A. 

The  extreme  lightness  of  such  a  construction,  the  facility  with 
which  all  the  materials  which  compose  it,  can  be  cut,  lifted,  and  set 
in  place,  explain  how,  even  with  feeble  resources,  one  could  think  of 
building  edifices  of  great  extent,  and  raised  high  above  the  ground. 
To-day  when  we  have  formed  the  habit  of  using  enormous  masses 
of  stones  of  huge  size  in  our  least  important  edifices,  and  of  employ- 
ing forces  of  ten  times  greater  resistance  than  is  necessary,  we 
should  not  dare  to  undertake  to  build  a  cathedral  as  large  as  that  of 
Noyon,  with  means  apparently  so  feeble,  and  we  should  expend 
fabulous  sums  in  executing  what  in  the  twelfth  century  they  could 
do  with  comparatively  the  smallest  resources. 

We  find  these  constructions  expensive,  because  we  will  not  employ 
the  processes  then  in  use. 

Yet  the  Cathedral  of  Noyon  has  stood  for  seven  centuries  and, 
provided  it  can  be  repaired  suitably,  it  can  last  five  hundred  years 
longer ;  now  twelve  hundred  years  appears  to  us  a  reasonable  dura- 
tion for  a  building,  since  the  great  social  revolutions  to  which 
humanity  is  subject,  will  destroy  them  anyhow,  even  if  they  are  able 
to  continue  for  a  longer  period. 

Besides  offering  advantages  of  economy,  of  facility  in  getting 
materials,  and  of  execution,  the  structures  built  with  small  materials 
were  also  perfectly  suited  to  the  system  adopted  by  the  architects  of 
the  twelfth  century. 

These  light  buildings,  showing  on  their  ground-plan  considerable 
voids  as  compared  with   the   solids,  and   submitted   to  oblique 


76 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  PRINCIPLES. 


pressures,  and  to  the  laws  of  equilibrium  which  took  the  place  of 
the  Roman  laws  of  inert  stability,  demanded  in  all  the  members 
which  composed  them  a  certain  elasticity. 

There,  where  the  builders,  less  imbued  with  the  new  principles 
then  admitted,  sought  to  reproduce  forms  that  the  lay  artists  of  the 
twelfth  century  had  adopted,  without  exactly  knowing  the  reason 
for  their  existence,  while  using  material  of  large  dimensions,  were 
produced  in  the  buildings  fractures  such  that  the  equilibrium  was 
soon  broken. 

If  the  arches  were  not  perfectly  independent  of  one  another,  if 
upon  one  point  they  had  placed  materials  of  great  height  and  size, 
and  if  beside  them  the  structure  was  made  only  of  stones  in  small 
pieces,  the  parts,  being  rigid,  or  too  firmly  attached  to  the  whole,  or 
too  heavy,  presented  a  resistance,  which  had  no  other  result  than  to 
cause  breaks  and  crevices  ;  while  the  too  solid  parts  of  the  struct- 
ure crushed  or  dragged  down  the  weak  parts. 

Let  us,  observe  again,  that,  in  these  monuments,  the  piers,  of  a 
slight  horizontal  section,  receive  all  the  weight  and  that  by  reason 
of  the  small  surface  of  their  beds  they  ought  to  settle  much  more 
than  the  walls,  for  example,  which  support  nothing,  since  they  are 
relieved  of  the  weight  of  the  roof,  and  the  upper  masonry  by  the 
wall-arches. 

If,  in  this  system,  there  is  complete  solidarity  between  these 
weighted  points  of  support  and  the  unweighted  filling,  enclosures, 
and  walls,  there  will  necessarily  be  a  rupture. 

But  if,  on  the  contrary,  the  builders  have  taken  care  to  have 
every  weighted  point  preserve  an  independent  function,  and  be  able 
to  move  and  settle  freely ;  if  the  accessory  parts  are  only  enclosures 
independent  of  the  effects  of  pressure  or  thrust,  then  ruptures  can- 
not take  place,  and  the  looseness  of  the  masonry  is  favorable  to  the 
endurance  of  the  structure  instead  of  being  injurious. 

The  Romans,  who  opposed  only  passive  resistance  to  the  thrusts, 
had  perfectly  admitted  this  principle  of  looseness,  of  liberty  between 


CONSTRUCTION. 


77 


the  weighted  parts  of  vaulted  constructions  and  those  which  are  not 
loaded.  The  great  halls  of  the  ancient  baths  are  in  this  matter 
triumphs  of  combination.  The  whole  system  consists  of  piers  support- 
ing the  vaults ;  the  walls  are  only  enclosures  built  afterwards,  which 
one  can  take  away  without  in  any  way  injuring  the  solidity  of  the  gen- 
eral framework  of  the  building.  Here  are  principles  very  natural 
and  very  simple ;  then  why  not  always  put  them  into  practice  ?  These 
principles  the  Gothic  builders  have  carried  much  farther  than  the 
Romans,  because  they  had,  as  we  have  said  many  times,  adopted  a 
system  of  construction  where  every  force  is  active,  and  where  there 
are  no  inert  resistances,  as  in  the  Roman  constructions,  to  act  by 
their  compact  mass. 

The  builders  of  the  twelfth  century,  raising  their  large  edifices  on 
plans  whose  solid  parts  cover  little  surface,  and  with  light  materials, 
in  opposing  to  oblique  thrusts  active  resistance  in  place  of  passive 
obstacles,  were  not  slow  to  perceive  that  it  was  always  necessary  to 
find  somewhere  that  inert  stability.  If  they  raised  flying-buttresses 
against  the  walls  of  the  vaults  at  the  points  of  their  thrusts,  these 
flying-buttresses  ought,  in  order  to  fill  their  role  effectively,  to  find  an 
immovable  impost ;  that  impost  was  found  in  an  exterior  support,  a 
sort  of  pier  raised  on  the  outside  of  the  buildings,  and  on  which  all  the 
thrusts  are  concentrated.  To  give  to  these  buttresses  a  horizontal 
section  broad  enough  to  preserve  the  immovability  of  their  mass  at 
a  great  height,  was  to  encumber  the  outside  of  these  edifices  with 
heavy  masonry  which  kept  out  the  light  and  air,  and  which  became 
very  expensive.  The  builders  had  no  longer  the  recipe  for  that 
mortar  which  was  the  principal  agent  in  the  great  Roman  construc- 
tions, and  the  piers  which  they  might  have  raised  would  not  have 
had  the  necessary  cohesion.  It  was  essential  then,  to  find  the  means 
of  substituting  for  the  inert  resistance  of  the  Roman  supports  a  force 
quite  as  powerful,  but  derived  from  a  different  principle.  This  was 
to  load  the  supports  destined  to  maintain  the  thrusts  until  they 
attained  a  weight  suflicient  to  resist  the  action  of  these  thrusts.  It 


78 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  PRINCIPLES. 


is  not  necessary  to  be  a  builder  to  know  that  a  prismatic  or  cylindrical 
pier  built  with  courses  of  stone  placed  one  upon  another,  and  having 
more  than  twelve  times  its  diameter,  cannot  stand  upright  unless  it  is 
weighted  at  its  upper 
end.  In  this  well-known 
law  of  statics  the  Gothic 
architects  believed  that 
they  had  found  the 
means  of  erecting  edi- 
fices whose  supports 
might  be  slender,  pro- 
vided they  were  loaded 
with  a  weight  capable 
of  rendering  them 
rigid  enough  to  re- 
sist oblique  and  con- 
trary thrusts. 

In  fact,  let  us  sup- 
pose a  pier  A  B  (Fig. 
32),  acted  upon  by  two 
oblique  and  contrary 
thrusts  C  D  and  E 
F  acting  at  different 
heights ;  the  stronger 
thrust,  that  of  C  D,  be- 
ing 10,  and  that  of  E  F 
being  4.  If  we  load  the  top  of  the  pier  B  with  a  weight  equivalent 
to  12,  not  only  the  thrust  CD  is  annulled,  but  still  more  so  that  of  E 
F,  and  the  pier  will  remain  upright.  Not  being  able  to  load  the 
piers  of  the  naves  with  a  weight  great  enough  to  annul  the  thrusts  of 
the  great  vaults,  the  builders  resolved  to  oppose  to  the  pressure  C  D 
a  flying-buttress  G.  Hence  the  weight  B  0,  increased  by  the  press- 
ure C  D,  becoming  15  for  example,  the  pressure  E  F  is  annulled. 


Fig.  32. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


79 


If  the  flying-buttress  G  opposes  to  the  thrust  C  D  a  resistance 
equal  to  this  oblique  pressure  and  neutralizes  it  completely,  the 
thrust  C  D  becomes  a  vertical  pressure  upon  the  pier  A  B,  and 
the  only  thing  necessary  is  to  sustain  the  oblique  action  of  the  flying- 
buttress  upon  the  exterior  buttress.  Now,  if  this  oblique  action  is 
in  itself  8,  it  is  not  increased  by  the  whole  of  the  thrust  C  D,  but 
only  by  a  slight  part  of  that  thrust.  It  is  something  like  10,  or 
12  perhaps,  in  certain  cases.  The  exterior  support  H,  opposing 
already,  by  its  own  mass,  a  resistance  of  8,  it  will  be  sufficient  to  load 
it  with  a  weight,  K,  of  5,  in  order  to  maintain  the  general  equilibrium 
of  the  building. 

We  shall  take  care  not  to  solve  by  algebraic  formulas  these  prob- 
lems of  equilibrium  that  practice  is  incessantly  modifying,  in  propor- 
tion to  the  nature  of  the  materials  used,  the  size  of  their  pieces,  the 
quality  of  the  mortar,  the  resistance  of  the  ground,  the  action  of 
external  agents,  and  the  greater  or  less  care  applied  to  the  construc- 
tion. Formulas  are  good  to  exhibit  the  knowledge  of  him  who  gives 
them,  but  they  are  almost  always  useless  to  the  practical  worker ; 
the  latter  allows  himself  to  be  directed  by  his  instinct,  his  experi- 
ence, his  observations,  and  that  feeling,  innate  in  every  builder, 
which  shows  him  what  he  ought  to  do  in  each  particular  case.  We 
do  not  hope  to  make  builders  out  of  those  to  whom  nature  has  re- 
fused that  quality,  but  to  develop  the  instincts  of  those  who  possess  it. 

One  cannot  teach  good  sense  or  reason,  but  one  can  learn  to  make 
use  of  the  one,  and  to  listen  to  the  other. 

The  study  of  the  Gothic  construction  is  useful  because  it  does  not 
adopt  those  absolute  formulas  which  are  always  neglected  in  execu- 
tion by  the  practitioner,  and  whose  least  danger  is  to  cause  men  to 
receive  error  with  that  confidence  that  truth  alone  should  inspire. 

If  the  Gothic  construction  is  not  submitted  to  absolute  formulas,  it 
is  the  slave  of  certain  principles.  All  its  efforts  and  improvements 
tended  to  convert  these  principles  into  laws,  and  laws  they  obtained 
as  the  result. 


80 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  PRINCIPLES. 


It  was  equilibrium ;  forces  of  compression  opposed  to  forces  of 
divergence ;  stability  obtained  by  weights  reducing  the  different 
oblique  forces  to  vertical  loads,  and  as  a  consequence,  the  reduction 
of  the  horizontal  sections  of  the  supports ;  such  are  these  principles, 
and  they  are  still  those  of  true  modern  construction ;  we  speak  not 
of  that  which  blindly  seeks  to  reproduce  edifices  built  under  condi- 
tions foreign  to  our  civilization  and  our  needs,  but  of  the  construction 
that  considers  our  modern  needs,  our  social  conditions. 

If  the  Gothic  builders  had  had  at  their  disposal  cast-iron  in  large 
pieces,  they  would  have  availed  themselves  eagerly  of  this  sure 
means  of  obtaining  supports  as  slender  as  possible  and  yet  rigid,  and 
perhaps  they  would  have  used  it  with  more  skill  than  ourselves. 
All  their  efforts  tend,  in  reality  to  the  balancing  of  forces,  and  to 
considering  the  supports,  henceforth,  only  as  slender  supports  kept 
vertical,  not  by  their  own  breadth  of  base,  but  by  the  complete 
balance  of  all  the  oblique  thrusts  which  act  upon  them.  Do  we 
ourselves  do  otherwise  in  our  domestic  constructions  and  in  our 
great  institutions  for  the  public  use,  where  the  needs  are  so  imperi- 
ous that  they  silence  the  teachings  of  routine  ?  And  if  any  fact 
ought  to  surprise  us,  is  it  not  to  see  to-day,  in  the  same  city,  the 
erection  of  houses,  markets,  depots  and  warehouses,  which  rest  upon 
slender  supports,  and  cover  considerable  surfaces,  while  leaving  to 
the  solid  walls,  a  scarcely  appreciable  foothold ;  and  to  see,  at  the 
same  time,  structures  where  the  stone,  collected  in  profusion,  is 
heaped  up,  block  on  block  in  order  merely  to  cover  surfaces  com- 
paratively small,  and  to  support  only  floors  exercising  no  oblique 
pressure?  Do  not  these  facts  indicate  that  architecture  has  strayed 
from  the  path  marked  out  for  it  by  our  needs  and  our  modern  spirit? 
That  it  is  seeking  vainly  to  protest  against  those  needs  and  that 
spirit?  That  the  time  is  not  distant  when  the  people,  wearied  by 
an  art  which  tries  to  disregard  their  needs  under  pretext  of  main- 
taining classic  traditions  for  which  they  care  little,  will  set  aside  the 
architect  among  the  archaeologists,  good  for  enriching  our  museums 


CONSTRUCTION. 


81 


and  our  libraries  with  their  learned  compilations,  and  for  amusing 
certain  societies  with  their  barren  discussions.  Now,  we  repeat, 
Gothic  construction,  despite  its  defects,  its  errors,  its  attempts  and 
perhaps  because  of  all  these,  is  a  pre-eminently  useful  study  ;  it  is  the 
surest  initiation  into  that  modern  art  which  does  not  yet  exist  but  is 
struggling,  because  it  establishes  the  true  principles  to  which  we 
ought  still  to  submit  to-day ;  because  it  has  broken  with  antique 
traditions,  and  because  it  is  fertile  in  applications.  It  matters  little 
whether  a  bell-tower  be  covered  with  ornaments  which  are  not  to 
the  taste  of  such  and  such  a  school,  if  this  bell-tower  have  a  reason 
for  its  existence,  if  its  function  be  necessary,  if  it  permit  us  to  take 
up  less  room  on  the  public  way. 

It  matters  little  that  the  pointed  arch  shocks  the  eyes  of  the 
exclusive  partisans  of  antiquity,  if  that  arch  be  more  solid  and  have 
more  resistance  than  the  semicircular,  and  we  save  a  considerable 
amount  of  stone.  It  matters  little  whether  a  column  has  twenty  or 
thirty  diameters,  if  that  column  suffice  to  carry  our  vault  or  our 
flooring.  Beauty  is  not,  in  an  art  wholly  conventional  and  logical, 
linked  forever  to  one  single  form ;  it  can  always  reside  there  when 
the  form  is  but  an  expression  of  satisfied  need,  of  judicious  use  of 
the  material  given.  Because  the  multitude  sees  in  Gothic  archi- 
tecture only  its  ornamentation,  and  because  this  ornamentation  no 
longer  belongs  to  our  time  is  this  a  proof  that  the  construction  of 
these  edifices  can  no  longer  find  an  application  ?  One  might  just  as 
well  maintain  that  a  treatise  on  geometry  is  worth  nothing  because 
it  is  printed  in  Gothic  characters,  and  that  students  reading  in  this 
book  that  "  the  angles  opposite  the  vertex  are  equal  to  each  other," 
are  learning  mere  folly  and  are  being  misled.  Now,  if  we  can  teach 
geometry  with  books  printed  yesterday,  we  cannot  do  the  same  in 
construction,  and  we  must  necessarily  seek  these  principles  where 
they  are  traced  —  in  the  monuments;  and  this  book  of  stone,  strange 
as  are  its  type  and  its  style,  is  as  good  as  any  other,  in  reality,  as  to 
the  ideas  that  it  has  suggested. 


82 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  PRINCIPLES. 


In  no  other  order  of  architecture  do  we  find  these  ingenious  and 
practical  means  of  solving  the  numerous  difficulties  which  surround 
the  constructor  living  in  the  midst  of  a  society  whose  needs  are 
complicated  to  excess.  Gothic  construction  is  not,  like  antique  con- 
struction, immutable,  absolute  in  its  means ;  it  is  supple,  free,  and  as 
inquiring  as  the  modern  spirit :  its  principles  permit  the  use  of  all 
the  materials  given  by  nature  or  industry  in  virtue  of  their  own 
qualities ;  it  is  never  stopped  by  a  difficulty ;  it  is  ingenious :  this 
word  tells  all.  The  Gothic  builders  are  subtile,  ardent  and  inde- 
fatigable workers,  reasoners,  full  of  resources,  never  stopping,  liberal 
in  their  methods,  eager  to  avail  themselves  of  novelties,  all  qualities 
or  defects  that  place  them  in  the  front  rank  of  modern  civilization. 
These  builders  are  no  longer  monks  submissive  to  rule  or  tradition; 
they  are  laymen  who  analyze  everything,  and  recognize  no  other 
law  than  that  of  reason.  Their  faculty  of  reasoning  scarcely  halts 
at  natural  laws,  and  if  they  are  forced  to  admit  these,  it  is  in  order 
to  conquer  them  by  opposing  them  one  to  another.  If  that  is  a 
fault,  does  it  become  us  to  reproach  them  ? 

We  must  be  pardoned  for  this  digression,  since  it  is  necessary  in 
order  to  explain  the  meaning  of  the  constructions  of  which  we  are 
about  to  give  numerous  examples.  Knowing  the  tendencies,  the 
independent  spirit  of  the  Gothic  builders,  their  patient  labor  amid  a 
society  which  had  scarcely  begun  to  be  organized,  our  readers  will 
better  appreciate  their  efforts  and  the  feeling  that  stimulated  them. 
Perhaps,  like  ourselves,  they  will  find  in  these  daring  innovators  the 
bold  modern  spirit,  perplexed  but  not  baffled  by  routine  and  the 
prejudices  of  system,  or  by  exclusive  dogmas. 

We  have  seen  at  the  beginning  of  this  article  that,  if  the  Roman 
construction  is  in  all  points  excellent,  wise,  harmonious,  like  the 
social  organization  of  that  people,  when  once  discovered,  it  pro- 
ceeded steadfastly  in  the  same  path,  following  invariably  the  same 
laws,  and  employing  the  same  means  of  execution  to  the  end  of  the 
later  empire. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


83 


It  was  good,  it  was  admirable,  but  it  could  not  undergo  a  change. 
The  principal  strength  of  the  Roman  people  lay  in  preserving  their 
social  organization  despite  the  most  evident  symptoms  of  dissolution. 
Their  architecture  proceeded  in  the  same  way ;  we  see,  under  the 
last  pagan  emperors,  the  execution  debased,  the  taste  degenerating, 
but  the  construction  remaining  the  same;  the  Roman  edifice  is  always 
Roman. 

Except  for  the  spherical  vault  upon  pendentives,  which  appeared 
at  Byzantium  when  the  Roman  Empire  was  nearing  its  end,  there 
is  no  progress,  no  change,  no  effort.  The  Romans  built  as  bees 
make  their  cells :  it  is  marvellous,  but  the  hives  of  to-day  are  lined 
as  the  hives  of  the  times  of  Noah.  If  we  gave  to  the  builders  of  the 
Baths  of  Titus  cast-iron,  forged  or  plate  iron,  wood  and  glass,  and 
asked  them  to  make  a  hall,  they  would  tell  us  that  no  one  could  build 
with  these  materials.  The  modern  spirit  is  different :  tell  it  to  build 
a  hall,  with  a  section  of  twenty  metres,  out  of  pasteboard,  and  it  will 
not  reply  that  the  thing  is  impossible ;  it  will  try,  it  will  invent 
means  for  giving  stiffness  to  the  pasteboard,  and  we  can  rest  assured 
that  the  hall  will  be  built. 

The  Roman  marks  out  the  plan  of  his  edifice  with  great  intelli- 
gence. He  takes  the  necessary  bases,  and  proceeds  with  assurance : 
there  is  no  anxiety  during  the  execution.  He  is  certain  of  the 
result  beforehand ;  he  has  taken  all  the  necessary  precautions,  he 
erects  his  building  with  security,  nothing  can  oppose  his  projects ; 
he  has  known  how  to  guard  against  all  accidents,  and  he  sleeps 
peacefully  while  his  edifice  is  raised  upon  immovable  bases. 
What  could  he  lack  ?  Room  ?  He  takes  it.  The  materials  ?  He 
finds  them  everywhere;  if  nature  refuses  them  to  him  h-e  manu- 
factures them.  The  labor,  the  transportations,  the  money?  He  is 
the  master  of  the  world.  The  Roman  is  a  superhuman  being :  he 
has  something  of  the  measured  grandeur  that  one  attributes  to  the 
Deity;  nothing  can  fetter  his  power.  He  builds  as  he  wills,  and 
where  he  wills,  on  the  site  that  he  chooses,  with  the  aid  of  workmen 


84  DEVELOPMENT  OF  PRINCIPLES. 


who  are  blindly  obedient  to  him.  Why  should  he  set  about  creating 
difficulties  for  himself?  Why  invent  machines  able  to  carry  the 
water  of  rivers  to  a  great  height,  when  he  can  seek  their  source  in 
the  mountains,  and  bring  them  into  the  city  by  a  natural  slope,  over 
vast  plains  ?  Why  struggle  against  the  regular  order  of  things  in 
this  world,  when  the  world,  both  men  and  things,  belongs  to  him  ? 

The  mistake  of  the  early  periods  of  the  Middle  Ages  was  in 
believing  that,  in  the  state  of  anarchy  into  which  society  had  fallen, 
one  could  repeat  what  the  Romans  had  done.  Moreover,  although 
this  period  of  transition  follows  the  traces  of  Roman  traditions,  what 
powerlessness  !  what  wretchedness  !  But  soon  there  arises  the  spirit 
of  modern  society ;  to  this  vain  desire  to  revive  an  extinct  civiliza- 
tion succeeds  the  antagonism  between  men,  the  strife  with  matter. 
Society  is  broken  up,  the  individual  is  responsible,  all  authority  is 
contested,  because  all  the  powers  neutralize  one  another,  and  are 
victorious  turn  by  turn.  They  discuss,  they  investigate,  they  hope. 
Among  the  debris  of  antiquity,  it  is  not  the  arts  that  they  are  going 
to  exhume,  but  philosophy,  the  knowledge  of  things.  Already,  in 
the  twelfth  century,  it  is  among  the  Greek  philosophers  that  the 
chosen  intellects  seek  their  weapons.  Then  that  society,  still  so  im- 
perfect and  so  wretched,  is  on  the  right  road ;  its  instincts  serve  it 
well ;  it  takes  from  the  remains  of  the  past  what  may  throw  light  on 
the  future  and  help  men  to  go  forward. 

Vainly  the  clergy  struggle  against  these  tendencies ;  despite  all 
the  power  at  the  disposal  of  clerical  feudalism,  it  is  itself  dragged 
into  the  controversy.  It  sees  rising  about  it  each  day  the  spirit  of 
examination,  discussion,  criticism.  Furthermore,  at  that  period, 
everything  which  tends  to  abase  one  power  is  supported  by  a  rival 
power.  The  national  genius  profits  skilfully  by  these  rivalries ;  it 
gathers  form  and  courage;  always  materially  subjugated,  it  makes 
itself  morally  independent,  and  follows  its  own  course  through  the 
struggles  of  all  these  powers,  too  little  enlightened  to  exact  from  the 
intelligent  throng  rising  about  them  anything  else  than  a  material 


CONSTRUCTION. 


85 


submission.  Many  others  before  us  have  said,  with  more  authority, 
that  political  history,  the  history  of  great  powers,  as  it  was  formerly 
written,  presents  only  one  narrow  side  of  the  history  of  nations,  and, 
in  fact,  illustrious  authors  of  our  own  time  have  shown  that  we  can 
know  the  life  of  the  people,  their  development,  the  causes  of  their 
change  and  their  progress,  only  by  searching  into  their  own  hearts. 
But  what  no  one  has  yet  written  is  the  history  of  those  energetic, 
active,  intelligent  men,  strangers  to  politics,  war  and  trade,  who,  in 
the  midst  of  the  Middle  Ages,  took  so  great  a  place  in  the  coun- 
try ;  of  those  artists  or  artisans,  if  one  prefers,  organized  into  corpo- 
rations ;  obtaining  extensive  privileges  through  the  need  that  people 
had  of  them  and  of  their  services ;  working  in  silence,  no  longer 
under  the  vaults  of  cloisters,  but  in  the  atelier ;  selling  their  material 
labor,  but  keeping  their  genius  independent  and  ready  for  novelty ; 
keeping  themselves  closely  united,  and  marching  together  toward 
progress,  in  the  midst  of  that  society  which  made  use  of  their  minds 
and  their  hands  without  comprehending  the  liberal  spirit  which 
animated  them. 

Let  others  undertake  a  task  merely  outlined  here  by  us ;  it  is  a 
noble  one,  and  sure  to  awaken  sympathy.  It  embraces  questions  of 
the  highest  order ;  perhaps  it  might  throw  light  upon  certain 
problems  of  our  day  which  occupy,  not  without  cause,  all  clear- 
sighted minds.  A  thorough  knowledge  of  the  past  is,  in  our  opinion, 
the  best  means  of  preparing  for  the  future ;  and  of  all  the  classes  of 
society,  that  one  whose  ideas,  tendencies  and  tastes  vary  the  least  is 
certainly  the  laboring  class  —  that  which  produces.  In  France,  that 
class  demands  more  and  other  things  than  its  daily  bread:  it 
demands  the  satisfaction  of  its  self-respect ;  it  demands  the  right  to 
keep  its  individuality;  it  wishes  difficulties  to  solve,  for  its  mind  is 
still  more  active  than  its  hands.  If  it  needs  material  occupation,  it 
also  needs  moral  occupation  ;  it  wishes  to  know  what  it  does,  and 
that  people  approve  what  it  does.  Every  one  admits  that  this  spirit 
reigns  among  our  soldiers,  and  assures  their  preponderance.  Why 


86 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  PRINCIPLES. 


not,  then,  recognize  its  existence  among  our  artisans  ?  To  speak 
only  of  buildings,  workmanship  has  declined  among  us  at  the  periods 
when  men  have  tried  to  submit  individual  labor  to  diverse  Classic 
rules  established  by  an  absolute  power.  Now,  when  workmanship 
declines,  social  crises  are  never  far  off  in  France.  Of  all  the 
industries,  that  of  building  certainly  occupies  the  greatest  number 
of  hands,  and  demands  from  each  man  a  rather  high  degree  of  intelli- 
gence. Masons,  stone-cutters,  lime-makers,  carpenters,  joiners, 
locksmiths,  roofers,  painters,  carvers,  cabinet-makers,  upholsterers, 
with  the  subdivisions  of  these  different  classes,  form  an  innumerable 
army  of  workmen  and  artisans  acting  under  one  directing  force, 
being  disposed  to  obey  it  and  even  to  second  it  when  it  is  enlightened, 
but  soon  out  of  control  when  that  directing  force  is  opposing  its  own 
nature.  Our  workmen  and  our  artisans  hear  and  follow  only  those 
who  can  tell  where  they  are  going  and  what  they  want.  The  word 
why  is  perpetually  in  their  mouths  or  in  their  glances,  and  there 
is  no  need  of  remaining;  long  among  workmen  engaged  in  building  in 
order  to  know  with  what  mocking  indifference  they  labor  at  things  for 
which  they  see  no  reason,  and  with  what  zeal  they  execute  works 
whose  practical  utility  they  perceive.  A  stone-cutter  does  not  work 
as  carefully  over  a  block  which  he  knows  is  to  be  hidden  in  masonry 
as  he  does  over  a  stone  to  be  in  sight,  whose  useful  function  he 
knows.  All  the  injunctions  of  the  overseer  can  do  nothing  against 
this  feeling.  It  is,  perhaps,  an  evil,  but  it  is  a  fact  easily  verified  in 
the  building-yard.  Regard  for  appearances  is  the  common  weak- 
ness of  France,  and,  not  being  able  to  overcome  it,  one  must  make 
use  of  it.  People  declare  that  we  are  Latins,  in  our  language, 
perhaps ;  but  in  our  manners  and  tastes,  in  character  and  spirit,  we 
are  not  so  any  more  to-day  than  in  the  twelfth  century.  Coopera- 
tion in  the  common  work  is  active,  devoted  and  intelligent  in  France 
when  men  know  that  this  cooperation,  feeble  as  it  may  be,  will  be 
seen,  and  hence  appreciated ;  it  is  languid,  lazy  and  careless  when 
men  suppose  it  overlooked  in  the  general  mass.    We  beg  our  readers 


CONSTRUCTION. 


87 


to  examine  well  this  national  spirit,  too  long  disregarded,  in  order  to 
understand  the  meaning  of  the  examples  that  we  are  about  to  place 
successively  before  their  eyes. 

To  familiarize  ourselves  with  an  art  whose  resources  and  practical 
means  have  been  forgotten,  we  must  first  enter  into  the  spirit  and 
the  innermost  feelings  of  those  to  whom  that  art  belongs.  Then 
everything  is  deduced  naturally,  everything  harmonizes,  and  the  aim 
appears  clearly.  We  do  not  pretend,  moreover,  to  disguise  any  of 
the  defects  of  the  systems  presented;  this  is  not  a  plea  in  favor  of 
the  Gothic  construction,  but  a  simple  exposition  of  its  principles  and 
their  consequences.  If  we  are  well  understood,  there  is  no  sensible 
architect  who,  after  having  listened  to  us  with  some  attention,  will 
not  recognize  the  uselessness,  to  say  no  more,  of  imitations  of  Gothic 
art,  and  who  will  not  understand  at  the  same  time  the  advantage 
that  one  can  derive  from  the  serious  study  of  that  art,  and  the  in- 
numerable resources  presented  by  that  study  so  closely  allied  to  our 
genius. 

We  are  about  to  pursue  the  examination  of  great  religious  con- 
structions, first,  because  they  are  the  most  important,  and,  next, 
because  they  are  developing  rapidly  at  the  end  of  the  twelfth  cen- 
tury, and  because  the  principles  in  accordance  with  which  these 
edifices  are  erected  are  applicable  to  every  other  construction.  We 
know  now  the  successive  phases  through  which  the  construction  of 
these  vaulted  edifices  had  to  pass,  in  order  to  change  from  the 
Roman  to  the  Gothic  system ;  in  other  terms,  from  the  system  of 
passive  resistances  to  the  system  of  active  resistances.  From  1150 
to  1200  they  were  building  in  the  Royal  domain,  in  the  Beauvoisis 
and  Champagne,  the  great  churches  of  Notre  Dame  at  Paris,  at 
Mantes,  at  Senlis,  at  Noyon,  the  choir  of  Saint  Remy  at  Rheims, 
at  Sens,  and  of  Notre  Dame  at  Chalons-sur-Marne,  all  after  the  new 
principles  adopted  by  the  lay  school  of  that  period,  all  having  pre- 
served a  perfect  stability  in  their  principal  works. 


CHAPTER  VI. 
Vaults. 

IN  every  thing  experience  or  practice  precedes  theory,  fact  pre- 
cedes law  ;  but  when  the  law  is  known  it  serves  to  explain  the  fact. 
We  observe  that  all  bodies  are  heavy,  and  that  some  force  draws 
them  toward  the  centre  of  the  globe.  As  yet  we  know  nothing  of 
the  pressure  of  the  atmosphere,  of  the  force  of  attraction,  of  the 
shape  of  the  earth ;  we  know  only,  that  every  heavy  body,  if  left  to 
itself,  is  drawn  vertically  toward  the  ground.  From  the  observation 
of  the  fact,  we  deduce  laws,  and  whether  these  laws  be  true  or  false, 
it  does  not  at  all  alter  the  nature  of  the  fact  or  its  recognized  effects. 
The  builders  of  the  twelfth  century  had  not  defined  the  laws  to 
which  the  voussoirs  of  an  arch  are  subjected,  namely  their  weight 
and  the  reaction  of  the  two  adjoining  voussoirs.  We  know  to-day, 
from  theory,  that  if  we  seek  on  each  bed  of  these  voussoirs  the  point 
through  which  the  resultant  of  the  pressures  acting  upon  them 
passes  and  if  we  draw  a  line  through  these  points,  we  thus  deter- 
mine a  curve  called  the  curve  of  pressures. 

We  discover,  again,  by  the  aid  of  algebraic  calculation,  that  if  one 
wishes  the  equilibrium  of  the  voussoirs  of  an  arch  to  be  perfect,  this 
curve  of  pressures,  whose  first  direction  at  the  key-stone  is  horizontal 
in  a  semicircular  arch,  must  not  touch  upon  any  point  in  the  lines 
of  the  intrados  and  extrados  of  the  arch.  This  curve  of  pressures, 
prolonged  down  through   the  arch,  when   it   rests   upon  piers, 


CONSTRUCTION. 


80 


determines  what  is  called  the  thrust :  then,  the  nearer  the  arch  comes, 
in  its  development,  to  a  horizontal  line,  the  farther  that  thrust  is 
from  the  vertical ;  and  the  farther  the  arch  from  being  a  horizontal 
line,  the  nearer  is  the  thrust  to  the  vertical.  The  Gothic  builders 
had  only  the  instinct  of  this  theory.  Perhaps  they  possessed  some 
of  those  mechanical  formulas  that  we  still  find  mentioned  by  the 
authors  of  the  Renaissance,  who  have  treated  of  these  matters,  and 
give  them  not  as  discoveries  of  their  time,  but,  on  the  contrary,  as 
traditions  good  to  follow.  With  regard  to  the  thrusts  of  arches,  for 
example,  they  made  use  still,  in  the  sixteenth  century,  of  a  very 
simple  geometrical  formula  for  estimating  the  strength  to  be  given 
to  abutments. 

In  Figure  32b  we  have  this  formula.  Given  an  arch  having 
A  B  as  its  diameter,  to  find  in  relation  to  the  nature  of  that  arch, 
what  should  be  the  thickness  of  the  piers  capable  of  resisting  its 
thrust.  We  divide  the  semicircle  or  the  pointed  arch  into  three 
equal  parts,  A  D,  D  C,  C  B ,  from  the  point  B,  as  a  centre,  we 
describe  an  arc  having  B  C  for  a  radius.  Then  we  pass  a  prolonged 
line  through  the  points  C  and  B.  Its  point  of  meeting  E  with  the 
arc  of  which  B  is  the  centre,  will  give  the  outer  facing  of  the  pier 
whose  thickness  will  be  equal  to  G  H.  If  we  proceed  in  the  same 
manner  upon  the  pointed  arches,  dividing  them  always  into  three 
equal  parts,  we  shall  obtain  abutments  as  much  less  thick  as  these 
arches  are  the  more  acute,  as  our  figure  shows.  Of  course  this 
process  is  only  applicable  to  arches  mounted  on  piers  of  equal  height 
for  these  different  arches,  and  if  not  more  than  one  and  one-half 
times  the  diameter  of  the  base  of  these  arches.  It  is  probable  that 
the  early  Gothic  architects  made  very  simple  rules  for  themselves  in 
ordinary  cases ;  but  it  is  certain  that  they  referred  only  to  their  own 
judgment  whenever  they  had  some  new  difficulty  to  solve.  As  if 
they  had  determined  the  laws  for  the  pressure  of  arches,  they 
arranged  to  concentrate  the  resisting  materials  upon  the  path  of 
these  lines,  and  thus  conducting  the  pressures  from  the  top  of  the 


90 


VAULTS. 


vaults  to  the  ground  they  arrived,  by  successive  steps,  at  consider- 
ing everything  outside  as  useless,  and  suppressing  it. 

We  wish  to  be  understood  by  everybody  and  will  not  deal  in 
definitions.    Let  us  take  an  example. 

Let  Figure  33  be  a  Roman  semicircular  cradle-vault ;  let  A  B  be 
the  curve  of  pressure  of  the  vous- 
soirs,  and  B  C  the  thrust.  If  the 
wall  th.at  supports  this  vault  has  the 
height  F  D,  its  thickness  must  be 
CD.  Since  all  the  oblique  pressure 
of  the  vault  bears  upon  the  point 
C,  of  what  service  is  the  triangle  of 
construction  E  D  F1  Suppose  now 
that  we  have  a  Gothic  vault  (Fig.  34) 
in  pointed  arches ;  the  resultant  of  the 
three  oblique  pressures  B  A ,  C  A,D  A, 
in  the  plan  will  be  a  line  A  E, 
and  in  the  cross-section  a  line  G  H. 


Fig.  33.  Fig.  326. 

The  instinct  of  the  builder  indicating  to  him  this  principle,  he  will 
arrange  his  whole  construction  to  relieve  this  point ;  in  other  words, 
he  will  move  back  the  vertical  support  /  0,  and  place  a  capital  M 


CONSTRUCTION. 


91 


whose  projection  shall  unite  with  the  direction  of  the  thrust  G  H. 
In  0  he  will  have  a  corbel  and  in  /  a  relieving-capital  so  as  to  bring 
P,  the  axis  of  the  lower  column,  as  near  as  possible  to  H,  the  point 
of  arrival  of  the  thrust  G  H.  But  being  forced  in  the  edifices  with 
three  naves,  to  leave  this  point  H  outside  of  the  axis  P  of  the  col- 
umn, he  no  longer  considers  the  latter  except  as  a  support  that 
must  be  kept  vertical  by  equilibrium.  He  then  neutralizes  all  the 
lateral  action  by  building  the  flying-buttress  K.  But,  some  one  will 
object,  why  keep  the  relieving-wall  (or  facing)  after  the  thrust  of 
the  great  vault  is  neutralized  by  the  pressure  of  the  flying-buttress? 
It  is  here  that  the  subtlety  of  the  builder  appears.  That  thrust  G  H 
is  neutralized,  but  it  exists ;  it  is  a  force  overpowered  but  not  sup- 
pressed. The  flying-buttress  checks  the  effects  of  that  thrust ;  that 
is  its  only  function,  for  it  cannot  take  away  this  oblique  action.  Let 
us  not  forget  that  there  is  a  lower  vault,  L,  whose  thrust  can  act 
only  upon  the  column  P,  and  that  this  thrust  can  be  suppressed  only 
by  the  vertical  weight  exercised  by  building  from  R  to  S ;  that  this 
vertical  weight  will  have  as  much  more  power  as  it  is  increased  by 
the  thrust  of  the  great  vault,  and  that  since  the  meeting  of  these  two 
forces,  vertical  and  oblique,  takes  place  in  a  single  point  S,  upon  the 
capital,  it  will  exactly  buttress  the  pressure  exerted  by  L  S.  To 
determine  this  action  by  calculations  would  be  a  sheer  waste  of 
labor,  for  these  calculations  must  vary  infinitely  by  reason  of  the 
height  or  breadth  of  the  spaces,  the  thickness  of  the  walls,  the  qual- 
ity of  the  material,  their  resistance,  the  height  of  the  courses,  etc. 
But  the  human  instinct,  when  it  is  acute,  is  always  more  subtle  than 
calculation;  just  as  there  is  no  machine,  however  perfect  it  may  be, 
which  attains  the  delicacy  of  the  hand  and  the  sureness  of  the  eye. 
In  this -case,  the  instinct  of  the  first  Gothic  builders  served  them 
well,  for  all  the  naves  built  with  monocylindrical  columns  arranged 
as  indicated  in  our  cross-section  (Fig.  34),  are  rarely  put  out  of 
shape  to  a  perceptible  extent;  while  the  majority  of  those  where 
the  piers,  composed  of  clusters  of  pillars,  rise  from  the  ground,  are 


92 


VAULTS. 


bent  more  or  less  at  the  height  of  the  thrust  of  the  lower  vaults. 
But  we  shall  have  occasion  to  return  later  to  this  subject. 

This  first  point  having  been  cleared  up,  let  us  come  now  to  the 
details  of  the  execution  ;  for  this  is  necessary.  Gothic  construction 
proceeds  (if  we  are  permitted  to  avail  ourselves  of  this  comparison) 


Fig.  34. 


from  an  organic  system  much  more  complicated  than  that  of  the 
Roman  construction.  "  So  much  the  worse,"  say  some,  "  it  is  a 
mark  of  inferiority."  "  So  much  the  better,"  say  others,  "  it  is 
a  proof  of  progress."  Progress  or  decadence,  it  is  a  fact  that  we 
must  recognize  and  study.    Already,  Figure  34  has  shown  that  the 


CONSTRUCTION. 


93 


combination  by  means  of  which  the  thrusts  of  vaults  are  maintained 
in  Gothic  buildings  is  by  no  means  simple.  Now,  every  construction 
starting  from  a  complicated  principle  brings  a  series  of  consequences 
that  cannot  be  simple. 

Nothing  is  so  imperiously  logical  as  a  building  erected  by  men 
reasoning  out  what  they  do  ;  we  shall  see  this  at  once.  The  choir 
of  St.  Remy  of  Rheims  was  rebuilt  about  1160,  at  the  time  when 
they  were  constructing  that  of  the  Cathedral  of  Paris.  This  con- 
struction, very  skilfully  conceived  in  its  whole,  showed  in  its  details 
only  a  series  of  attempts ;  which  indicates  a  school  already  far 
advanced  in  theory,  but  of  very  little  experience  in  execution.  The 
principle  of  weight  and  equilibrium  which  we  have  previously  out- 
lined, are  there  rigidly  applied.  But  evidently  workmen  and  over- 
seers in  the  building-yard  were  lacking  to  these  first  Gothic  builders  ; 
and  they  neither  had  the  time  nor  the  means  of  training  skilful  laborers, 
for  no  one  understood  them.  Furthermore,  the  choir  of  St.  Remy  of 
Rheims  must  with  reason  have  excited  the  admiration  of  the  builders 
at  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century,  for  the  methods  there  adopted  are 
followed  in  Champagne  at  that  period,  and  notably  in  the  rebuild- 
ing of  the  choir  of  the  church  of  Notre  Dame  at  Chalons-sur-Marne. 

But  first  let  us  describe  in  a  few  words  the  history  of  this  charm- 
ing edifice.  The  church  of  Chalons-sur-Marne  was  built  during  the 
early  years  of  the  twelfth  century.  It  then  consisted  of  a  nave  with 
aisles ;  the  nave  was  roofed  over,  probably  by  timbers  resting  on 
transverse  arches,  like  many  of  the  churches  of  that  period  in 
Champagne  ;  and  the  aisles  were  vaulted  by  means  of  transverse 
arches  separating  Roman  groined  vaults.  The  choir  was  composed 
of  an  apse  without  aisles,  but  with  two  square  chapels  opening  into 
the  transepts,  under  two  steeples,  like  the  cathedral  of  the  same  city. 
Toward  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century  (although  this  structure  had 
been  raised  under  excellent  conditions,  and  nothing  leads  us  to  the 
supposition  that  it  had  deteriorated),  these  arrangements  were  no 
longer  in  harmony  with  the  ideas  of  the  time  :  they  were  now  wishing 


94 


VAULTS. 


for  vaulted  naves,  with  aisles  and  chapels  radiating  out  around 
the  chancel.  So  the  church  had  to  undergo  a  complete  rebuilding : 
the  circular  wall  of  the  apse  was  replaced  by  detached  columns ; 
they  built  an  aisle  opening  into  three  circular  apsidal  chapels  ;  they 
kept  the  two'  steeples  which  flanked  the  apse  but  pierced  the  wall  at 
the  floor  of  the  square  chapels  arranged  under  these  towers,  and 
these  served  to  communicate  with  the  aisle  of  the  apse. 

The  nave  was  made  higher  and  completely  vaulted  ;  and  in  place 
of  the  Roman  vaults  over  the  aisles  they  built  pointed  vaults. 
Some  capitals  taken  down  from  the  original  structure  were  replaced, 
notably  in  the  side  aisle  of  the  apse. 

This  historic  summary  shows  how  much  they  were  disposed  to 
profit  by  all  the  resources  presented  by  the  new  system  of  archi- 
tecture then  hardly  sketched  out.  The  construction  of  the  apse  of 
the  Church  of  Notre  Dame  at  Chalons-sur-Marne  is  a  very  little  later 
than  that  of  the  choir  of  Saint  Remy  of  Rheims,  but  already  it  is 
more  scientific  ;  one  still  perceives  many  blind  attempts,  and  yet  the 
progress  is  perceptible. 

We  ought  here  to  resume  the  matters  previously  under  discussion. 
We  have  described  the  simple  groined  vault  raised  between  parallel 
walls,  and  we  have  indicated  the  first  efforts  of  the  architects  to 
build  and  maintain  this  on  its  piers.  We  must  return  to  this  subject 
and  examine  the  varieties  of  these  vaults. 

From  the  eleventh  century,  already,  they  had  surrounded  the 
chancels  of  churches  by  aisles  with  or  without  radiating  chapels. 
(  See  "  Architecture  Religieuse")  That  method,  foreign  to  the  plan 
of  the  early  basilica,  had  caused  builders  more  than  one  perplexity. 
Roman  antiquity  left  nothing  similar  to  it.  Certainly  the  Romans 
had  built  porticos  upon  a  circular  plan,  but  these  porticos,  if 
vaulted,  were  composed  of  thick  piers  supporting  a  cradle-vault  in 
which  two  semi-cylinders  met,  forming  groined  vaults,  or  a  succes- 
sion of  radiating  cradle-vaults  fixed  on  arches,  or  even  on  horizontal 
imposts  faced  in  stone,  as  still  seen  in  the  amphitheatre  of  Nismes. 


Fig.  35. 


96 


VAULTS. 


But  the  Romans  had  by  no  means  the  idea  of  placing  groined 
vaults  over  porticos  formed  of  detached  monocvlindrical  columns, 
for  that  could  not  agree  with  their  principle  of  inert  stability. 
What  the  Romans  had  not  done,  in  that  as  in  many  other  things, 
the  builders  of  the  Romanesque  period  attempted.  They  wished  to 
surround  the  chancels  of  their  churches  with  porticos  or  concentric 
aisles  following  the  curve  of  the  apse,  and  to  give  as  much  light  as 
possible  to  these  porticos  by  supporting  the  vaults  on  detached 
columns,  which  were  to  cover  them.  In  the  first  instance,  as  in  the 
churches  of  Auvergne  and  Poitou,  they  were  satisfied  with  a  cradle- 
vault  on  a  circular  plan,  cut  by  the  intersection  of  arches  from  one 
column  to  another.  To  buttress  the  thrust  of  these  cradle-vaults 
on  the  inside,  they  relied  at  first  on  the  weight  which  bore  down  on 
the  columns,  and  then  on  the  circular  form  of  the  apse  which  offered 
to  these  thrusts  a  great  resistance.  The  aisles  of  the  apses  are  thus 
vaulted  in  the  churches  of  Notre  Dame  du  Port,  at  Clermont,  at 
Issoire,  at  Saint  Nectaire,  at  Saint  Savin  near  Poitiers,  etc. 

Figure  35  explains  this  method,  without  the  need  of  further 
development.1 

But  when  during  the  twelfth  century,  the  builders  had  introduced 
the  system  of  vaults  with  pointed  arches,  they  naturally  wished  to 
apply  it  everywhere,  and  thought,  with  reason,  that  it  was  impossible 
to  keep  in  the  same  edifice  the  system  of  Roman  groined  vaults 
beside  the  new  style.  Easy  as  it  was  to  place  upon  the  oblong 
abacus  of  the  capitals  A,  the  skew-backs  B,  shaped  so  as  to  receive 
a  simple  groined  vault,  so  much  more  difficult  did  that  become  when 
the  groined  vault  yielded  to  transverse  and  diagonal  arches.  This 
difficulty  was  not  the  only  one. 

If  we  represent  a  section  of  the  plan  of  the  apse  of  the  Church  of 
Notre  Dame  du  Port  with  its  aisles  (Fig.  36)  we  shall  see  that  the 
intersections  of  the  semi-cylinders  A  and  B  in  the  circular  cradle- 
vault  C  C  give,  in  horizontal  section,  the  two  lines  E  F  and  G  H 

iThe  aisle  of  the  choir  of  Notre  Dame  du  Port,  at  Clermont. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


07 


crossed.  We  observe  that  the  portico  being  on  a  circular  plan,  the 
opening  H  F  is  greater  than  the  opening  EG;  that,  if  we  should 
build  one  semicircular  arch  over  H  F  and  another  over  E  G,  this 
latter  would  have  its  key  much  lower  than  the  former ;  that  the 
intersection  of  the  semi-cylinder  whose  diameter  is  E  G,  with 
the  circular  cradle-vault  C  C,  would  be  outlined  in  horizontal  section 
by  the  line  E'  L  G',  and  that  consequently  there  would  be  no  groined 
vault,  but  simply  the  intersection  of  a  small  cylinder  with  a  great 
one.  To  obtain  a  groined  vault,  E  F  G  H,  the  builders  raised  the 
semicircular  arch  drawn  above  E  G,  as  the  revolved  section  /  K  M 
indicates  by  taking  a  height  N  M  equal  to  the  radius  0  P. 

Thus  the  abaci  of  the  four  engaged  and  free  columns  R,  S,  V,  T, 
being  on  the  same  level,  the  two  keys  M  and  P  were  found  in  the 


Fig.  36, 


same  horizontal  line  which  governed  the  length  of  the  radius  of 
the  cradle-vault  C  C 

The  idea  of  raising  semicircles  upon  the  isolated  columns  T  and  V, 
was   then  no   caprice,  or  barbaric  whim,  still   less  an  Oriental 


98 


VAULTS. 


imitation,  as  men  have  sometimes  claimed,  but  the  result  of  a  very 
simple  calculation  on  the  part  of  the  builder. 

This  first  step  taken,  let  us  now  see  how  the  architects  of  the 
twelfth  century,  inaugurating  the  use  of  the  diagonal-arch  vault  on  a 
circular  plan,  tried  to  go  farther.  Let  us  not  forget  that  one  of  the 
motives  that  had  led  tbem  to  adopt  the  diagonal-arch  vault,  was 
the  desire  to  get  rid  of  certain  troublesome  necessities  imposed 
by  the  antique  groined  vault :  the  need  of  independence  felt  by  the 
builders.  But  independence  in  building,  as  in  everything  else,  is 
acquired  only  after  abortive  attempts.  The  architects  of  the  twelfth 
century  felt  sure  that  their  principles  were  fertile  in  application, 
that  they  would  lead  them  to  surmount  without  effort  the  difficulties 
in  the  building  of  great  edifices;  yet,  as  it  always  happens,  these 
principles  at  once  so  simple  and  so  adaptable,  embarrassed  them 
cruelly  in  the  immediate  application ;  and  in  order  to  remain  loyal 
to  them  they  complicated  their  buildings,  and  being  unable  to  rid 
themselves  altogether  of  old  traditions,  but  wishing  to  reconcile 
them  with  their  new  ideas,  they  fell  into  infinite  difficulty.  Yet  far 
from  being  discouraged,  they  clung  after  each  attempt  to  these  new 
ideas  with  the  zeal  and  persistence  of  a  people  wholly  convinced. 
We  shall  see  them  at  work  in  the  Cathedral  of  Langres,  one  of  the 
most  instructive  monuments  in  France,  and  certainly  one  of  the  best 
built.  There,  ancient  traditions  have  considerable  sway;  Langres 
is  a  Roman  city  in  a  district  covered  but  a  few  centuries  ago  with 
numerous  Roman  edifices  almost  intact.  But  let  us  come  to  the  fact 
that  concerns  us  particularly,  to  the  vaults  with  diagonal  arches 
over  the  aisle  of  the  chancel. 

The  monocylindrical  column,  which  even  in  purely  Gothic 
structures  lasted  so  long,  is  employed  in  the  choir  of  the  Cathedral 
of  Langres.  These  columns  have  the  proportions  of  the  Roman 
Corinthian  column,  and  their  capital  is  quasi-Roman;  but  (Fig.  37) 
their  abacus  is  already  arranged  with  a  view  to  what  it  must  sup- 
port ;  two  of  its  sides  are  not  parallel,  and  they  form  an  angle  in  order 


CONSTRUCTION. 


99 


to  avoid  irregular  surfaces  at  the  intrados  of  the  archivolts  A,  that 
they  carry;  and  on  the  side  of  the  aisle  this  abacus  gives  a  broken 
line  in  order  to  offer  a  projecting  support  to  the  transverse  arch  B. 

In  X  we  give  the  horizontal  projection  of  these  nbaci.  Feeling 
the  necessity  of  separating  the  transverse  arches  and  of  leaving  a 


Fig.  37, 


place  for  the  diagonal  arches  to  start,  and  fearing  the  action  of  the 
thrust  of  the  vaults  upon  the  columns,  in  spite  of  the  circular  form 
of  the  apse,  the  architect  has  surmounted  this  abacus  with  a  project- 
ing corbel  C. 


100 


VAULTS. 


As  our  figure  shows,  the  diagonal  arches  D  scarcely  find  room  to 
start,  yet  the  instinct  of  the  artist  has  led  him  to  ornament  that 
starting-point  in  order  to  disguise  its  inadequacy.  There  are  three 
skew-backs  one  upon  another.  The  first  two,  E  and  F,  have  their 
beds  horizontal,  while  the  third,  G,  has  its  sections  normal  to  the 
curve  of  the  arch.  So  these  arches  succeed,  not  without  difficulty, 
in  disengaging  themselves  from  the  square  plan,  and  even  the 
diagonal  arch  must  make  its  way  between  the  voussoirs  of  the  archi- 
volts  and  of  the  transverse  arches. 

But  now  the  builder  wishes  to  double  his  archivolt  A  with  a 
second  arch  /  which  shall  intersect  the  diagonal  arch,  for  the  wall 
surmounting  these  archivolts  is  thick,  and  carries  a  semidome  or 
oven-shaped  vault.  It  is,  then,  only  above  the  diagonal  arch  and 
when  this  leaves  the  abutments  that  one  can  fix  the  second  arch  /. 
This  is  not  all,  for  since  these  vaults  radiate,  the  architect  has  drawn 
his  diagonal  arches  in  plan,  as  indicated  in  (Fig.  38)  ;  the  surface  K 


L  M  N  being  a  trapezium,  the  builder  yet  supposing  it  impossible 
to  draw  diagonal  arches  forming  in  their  horizontal  projection  broken 
lines,  the  key  0  is  nearer  to  the  line  M  N  than  to  the  line  K  L. 
The  arch  K  L  having  its  summit  on  a  higher  plane  than  that  of 


s 


Fig.  3  8. 


Fig.  39. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


101 


the  arch  M  N  (for  they  have  not  dared  to  make  that  higher),  the 
line  R  S  slopes  from  R  to  S. 

(Fig.  37)  shows  this  arrangement,  and  the  section  (Fig.  39)  ex- 
plains it  still  better.  Moreover  a  construction  of  this  kind,  whether 
preconceived  or  produced  by  chance,  presents  advantages :  it  allows 
the  light  entering  under  the  wall-arches  of  the  vaults  to  pass  from 
the  aisles  into  the  midst  of  the  chancel ;  it  does  not  waste  the  height 
of  the  sloping  roof  at  A  ;  the  slope  of  this  roof  and  that  of  the 
vault  give  room  for  the  gallery  B;  moreover  it  offers  a  great 
resistance,  in  that  it  throws  a  large  part  of  the  weights  and  thrusts 
upon  the  interior  semi-cylinder  which,  forming  the  vault,  runs  no  risk 
of  separating  off  in  slices  and  leaving  its  centre. 

At  Notre  Dame  du  Port  the  abaci  of  the  capitals  (Fig.  36)  give 
parallelograms  in  their  plan,  so  as  to  offer  a  thick  enough  impost  for 
the  wall  of'  the  chancel ;  and  the  result  is  that  the  arches  raised  over 
these  abaci  present  irregular  surfaces  and  cones  rather  than  semi- 
cylinders. 

At  the  Cathedral  of  Langres,  the  abaci  of  the  capitals  are  out- 
lined, as  we  have  noticed,  in  angular  form,  in  order  to  keep  at  the 
intrados  of  the  archivolts  curved  surfaces  which  are  exactly  parts  of 
a  cylinder.  Thus  they  avoided  a  difficulty  of  facing  and  of  warped 
surfaces  displeasing  to  the  eye,  but  the  angular  abaci  made  the 
capitals  ungraceful.  When  looked  at  parallel  to  the  diagonals  they 
presented  on  the  side  of  the  aisle  an  angle  of  greater  projection  than 
on  the  side  of  the  chancel.  The  architects  of  the  Gothic  school  soon 
freed  themselves  from  these  perplexities,  and  learned  how  to  avoid 
these  difficulties. 

Our  readers  will  at  once  see  why  we  have  lingered  over  the 
drawing,  and  the  mode  of  constructing  the  vaults  radiating  from 
the  aisles  of  the  apses.  One  word  more  before  proceeding  to  the 
improvements  introduced  by  the  Gothic  architects.  These  had 
originally  adopted  two  methods  of  neutralizing  the  thrust  of  vaults  : 
the  first  method  was  that  of  restraining  the  effects  of  these  thrusts 


102 


VAULTS. 


by  a  force  acting  in  opposition  ;  the  second,  which  one  might  call 
the  preventive  method,  consisted  in  destroying  these  effects  at  the 
outset,  or,  in  other  words,  in  hindering  them  from  acting.  They 
employed  one  or  the  other  of  these  two  methods  according  to  the 
need :  sometimes  they  profited  by  the  effects  of  the  thrusts,  though 
without  permitting  them  to  destroy  the  general  equilibrium,  as  we 
have  seen  in  Figure  34 
and  sometimes  they 
annulled  them  and 
reduced  them  at  once 
to  a  vertical  pressure. 

A  very  simple  draw- 
ing will  explain  the 
application  of  these 
two  methods. 

Let  (Fig.  40)  there 
be  a  vault,  the  result- 
ant of  whose  pressures 
is  the  line  A  B,  we  can 
establish  a  construc- 
tion like  that  given  in 
our  drawing. 

In  supposing  the 
stones  C  and  D  to  be 
of  a  single  piece  each, 
having  resistance,  and 
fastened  at  the  end 
under  the  buttress,  this 
construction    will  be 


Fig.  40. 


more  solid  than  if  we  had  built  a  pier  E  A  from  the  ground,  under 
the  skewbacks  of  the  vault. 

In  this  drawing  we  profit  by  the  effects  of  the  thrust  A  B,  and 
we  draw  it  off  according  to  its  direction. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


103 


The  flying-buttress  G  and  its  masonry  are  there  only  to  hinder 
the  vault  from  spreading  in  a  horizontal  direction. 

Let  us  notice,  in  passing,  that  the  flying-buttress  does  not  weigh 
upon  the  pier  X,  and  that  it  does  nothing  but  counteract  the  thrust 


Fig.  406. 


of  the  vault  at  the  point  where  the  curve  of  pressures  tends  to  come 
out  at  the  extrados  of  the  voussoirs. 

This  is  the  method  which  restrains  the  effects  of  the  thrusts,  but 
by  using  them  as  an  element  of  equilibrium. 

Now,  let  (Fig.  406)  there  be  a  vault,  the  resultant  of  whose 


104 


VAULTS. 


thrust  is  the  line  A  B.  If,  in  place  of  a  flying-buttress  we  oppose  to 
the  thrust  A  B  a  less  powerful  thrust  C  D,  and  if  we  place  a  weight 
E  to  bear  upon  the  extremities  of  the  two  vaults,  we  reduce  the 
oblique  thrusts  to  a  vertical  pressure ;  we  prevent  their  effects,  they 
do  not  act.    This  is  what  we  call  the  preventive  method. 

There  is,  then,  this  very  sjubtile  distinction  between  these  construc- 
tions :  First,  the  flying-buttress  is  simply  an  obstacle  opposed,  not  to 
the  oblique  pressures,  but  to  their  effects,  if  the  equilibrium  should 
be  disturbed;  Second,  it  permits  the  builder  to  profit  by  these 
oblique  pressures  in  his  general  system,  without  fear  of  seeing  the 
economy  of  this  system  deranged  by  some  action  beginning  outside 
of  the  equilibrium. 

But  the  entire  attention  of  the  builders,  for  that  very  reason,  is 
brought  to  bear  upon  the  perfect  stability  of  the  supports  receiving 
the  thrusts  of  the  flying-buttresses ;  for  the  equilibrium  of  the  forces 
of  the  different  parts  of  an  edifice  depends  upon  the  stability  of  the 
exterior  abutments.  Still  the  architects  often  will  not  or  cannot  give 
these  abutments  a  sufficient  thickness  in  proportion  to  their  height; 
so  they  must  make  them  firm  by  factitious  means. 

We  have  an  example  of  the  use"  of  such  means  in  the  church  of 
Saint  Remy  of  Rheims,  though  seen  still  more  clearly  in  the  choir 
of  the  church  of  Notre  Dame  at  Chalons,  to  which  we  now  return. 

We  first  present  (Fig.  41)  the  plan  of  a  part  of  that  apse,  in  A  at 
the  ground  floor,  in  B  at  the  height  of  the  vaulted  gallery,  in  C  at  the 
height  of  the  triforium  and  in  D  at  the  height  of  the  springing  of 
the  vaults.  We  see,  on  the  ground  plan,  how  the  architect  has 
avoided  the  perplexity  of  building  a  vault  with  diagonal  arches,  over 
a  trapezium.  He  has  placed  at  the  entrance  of  the  chapels  the  col- 
umns E,  which  have  allowed  him  to  draw  a  vault  E  F  G  upon  the 
parallelogram.  Therefore  the  transverse  arch  E  H  is  similar  in 
width  and  height  to  the  transverse  arch  F  /,  and  the  line  I  H 
through  the  key  of  the  triangular  fillings  is  not  inclined,  as  at 
Langres,  from  the  outside  inward.    From  E  to  K  a  second  trans- 


verse  arch  unites  the  column  E  to  the  pier  K,  and  there  remains  a 
triangle  KEF,  easy  to  vault  since  it  is  only  a  portion  of  ordinary 
filling. 


106 


VAULTS. 


The  method  is  the  same  at  Saint  Remy  of  Rheims,  but  not  so  well 
exemplified. 

It  will  be  seen  that  these  higher  plans  fit  exactly  over  the  ground 
plan  unless  there  is  some  deviation,  whose  necessity  we  shall  at  once 
recognize. 

There  is  one  important  fact,  in  the  construction  of  the  choir  of 
Notre  Dame  of  Chalons,  in  that  it  shows  the  efforts  of  the  master- 
builder  to  clear  away  certain  difficulties  which  had  perplexed  his 
confreres  at  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century. 

It  will  be  observed  that  the  plan  of  the  chancel  gives  angular  faces 
on  the  interior  and  a  semicircular  curve  on  the  exterior.  In  the 
same  way  the  lower  archivolts  L  connecting  the  great  columns  on 
the  ground-floor,  are  ranged  along  the  sides  of  a  dodecagon,  while 
the  archivolts  of  the  gallery  on  the  first  story  are  on  a  rectilinear 
plan  over  the  chancel,  and  on  a  curved  plan  over  the  gallery.  The 
outer  wall  of  this  gallery  is  also  built  on  a  semicircular  plan,  and 
the  triforium  (Plan  C)  is  on  a  rectilinear  plan  within,  and  curved 
without.    It  is  the  same  with  the  upper  windows  (Plan  D). 

The  architect  had  wished  to  avoid  the  perplexity  given  by  the 
construction  of  archivolts  or  of  transverse  arches  over  a  semicircular 
plan  of  a  rather  small  radius.  He  feared  the  thrusts  into  vacant 
space,  and  keeping  the  circular  form  only  on  the  outside,  and  chang- 
ing it  to  a  dodecagon  in  the  inside,  he  united  very  skilfully  the 
advantages  of  the  two  systems ;  in  other  words,  great  lines  of  walls 
and  concentric  bands,  a  simple  arrangement  without,  but  combining 
great  solidity  with  a  graceful  effect  in  the  chancel ;  for  arches 
opened  in  a  circular  wall  of  small  diameter  always  have  the  effect 
on  the  eye  of  very  disagreeable  lines. 

A  perspective  view  (Fig.  42)  of  the  aisle  with  the  entrance  to  a 
chapel  will  render  the  arrangement  of  the  ground-floor  easy  for  all 
to  understand,  and  will  indicate  its  construction. 

The  detached  columns  of  the  chapels  are  monoliths,  30  centi- 
meters in  diameter  at  the  most ;  the  rest  of  the  construction,  except 


CONSTRUCTION. 


107 


Fig  42. 


108 


VAULTS. 


Fig.  43. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


109 


the  pillars  at  the  angles  of  the  chapels  and  those  of  the  windows, 
are  built  in  courses. 

We  now  give  (Fig.  43)  the  cross-section  of  this  building  as  far  as 
the  vaults,  following  the  line  M  N  of  the  horizontal  plan. 

This  section  shows  us  at  A,  in  conformity  with  the  method  then 
used  in  Ile-de-France  and  the  adjacent  provinces,  the  monocylindri- 
cal  columns  marked  0  upon  the  plan ;  at  B  the  archivolt  and  the 
separation  of  the  vaults  of  the  aisle.  The  principal  churches  of  that 
period  and  that  province  all  have  a  vaulted  gallery  on  the  first  story. 
(See  "  Architecture  Religieuse,  Cathedrale,  Eglise") 

Here  the  vault  slopes,  like  that  of  the  aisle  in  the  Cathedral  of 
Langres,  and  this  is  not  without  motive  (see  plan  B,  Fig.  41). 

In  fact,  the  wall-arch  C,  being  wider  at  the  base  than  the  archi- 
volt D,  has  its  key  higher  up,  which  allows  the  cutting  of  large  win- 
dows suitable  for  lighting  the  choir. 

The  triforium  E,  occupying  quite  a  large  space  between  the  key 
of  the  archivolts  of  the  gallery  above  the  aisle  and  the  sills  of  the 
upper  windows,  allows  a  roof  F  to  be  built  over  that  gallery,  with 
a  sufficient  slope  in  spite  of  the  inclination  of  the  vault  G. 

Let  us  examine  this  section  with  attention. 

We  see  that  the  abacus  of  the  capital  of  the  pier  A,  receives  as  a 
corbel  the  base  of  the  column  H,  which  supports  the  skeleton  of 
the  vault ;  this  pillar  and  the  two  others  flanking  it  and  support- 
ing the  wall-arches  do  not  unite  with  the  building,  but  are  composed 
of  great  blocks  of  stone  set  contrary  to  their  cleavage. 

It  is  the  same  with  the  pillars  resting  against  the  gallery  and  the 
engaged  column  /.  Thus  the  pier  at  the  height  of  the  gallery  is  a 
parallelopipedon  composed  of  courses  and  surrounded  by  columns 
set  contrary  to  their  cleavage  like  posts  of  timber  in  order  to  keep 
their  rigidity  under  the  weight  and  pressure  from  above. 

It  is  the  same  with  these  piers  at  the  height  of  the  triforium  E 
(see  plan  C)  ;  the  core  is  built  of  stone  courses,  and  the  pillars 
around  it  on  three  sides  are  set  contrary  to  their  cleavage. 


110 


VAULTS. 


The  large  pillars  at  the  top  are  fastened  by  bands,  forming  rings, 
to  the  main  part  of  the  construction,  by  their  base  and  the  capital 
K  under  the  skewbacks.  To  maintain  this  equilibrium  it  was  neces- 
sary to  have  recourse  to  flying-buttresses.  It  will  be  seen  in  the 
ground-plan  (Fig.  41)  that  the  architect  wishing  to  make  his  chapels 
as  open  as  possible,  placed  behind  the  pier  K,  only  a  very  light 
partition  of  stone. 

He  could  not  build  upon  that  partition  a  solid  abutment ;  moreover 
he  had  propped  the  vaults  of  the  gallery  above  the  aisle  by  a  first 
flying-buttress  L  (see  cross-section)  transferring  that  thrust  to  the 
more  distant  abutment  of  the  gallery  wall.  But  he  lacked  space  on 
the  exterior,  and  he  did  not  wish  the  projection  of  the  buttresses  to 
pass  beyond  the  circular  line  surrounding  the  chapels.  This  abut- 
ment was  then  not  deep  enough,  and  unable  to  resist  the  thrust  of 
the  large  flying-buttress.  So  instead  of  starting  the  large  buttress 
from  the  perpendicular  of  the  facing  M,  the  builder  has  changed  the 
starting  point  to  0. 

He  thus  obtained  from  0  to  P  a  powerful  abutment,  and  if  he 
weighted  the  haunches  of  the  lower  buttress  L,  the  latter  gained 
great  resistance,  first,  from  the  extraordinary  size  given  to  it,  and 
next  from  R,  the  load  above,  which  pressed  on  its  abutment. 
Moreover,  to  avoid  the  effect  of  the  thrust  of  the  great  vault  between 
the  head  of  the  large  flying-buttress  S  and  the  starting-point  of  the 
vaults  T,  he  placed  upon  the  outer  wall  of  the  triforium  E,  a  column 
F,  contrary  to  its  cleavage,  which  stiffened  that  space  perfectly,  just 
as  a  strong  post  of  timber  might  have  done. 

Also,  under  the  impost  T  which  forms  a  lintel  in  the  triforium 
and  juts  out  a  little  beyond  it,  the  architect  placed  an  arch  Q,  which 
was  a  powerful  prop  to  all  the  upper  part  of  the  construction,1  and 
offered  even  greater  resistance  to  the  arch  L. 

1  These  arches  have  since  been  destroyed  and  replaced  by  masonry  and  timbers, 
when  the  roof  was  rebuilt  in  the  fifteenth  century.  It  would  be  timely  to  think 
about  rebuilding  them. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


Ill 


Knowing  the  effects  of  the  thrusts  of  the  gallery  vaults  and  of  the 
flying-buttress  Z,  which  was  destined  to  annul  them,  and  fearing 
the  action  of  the  thrust  caused  by  too  broad  a  vault  upon  the  interior 
piers  at  the  height  of  the  gallery  above  the  aisle,  the  architect 
moved  the  pier  X  out  of  the  perpendicular  line  of  the  lower  column 
Y,  since  he  had  no  reason  to  fear  a  vertical  pressure  on  this  point, 
but  much  rather  an  oblique  thrust  from  X  toward  Z.  As  to  the 
large  flying-buttress,  its  voussoirs  pass  toward  the  centre  of  the  arch 
over  the  column  V,  as  if  this  column  did  not  exist;  and  under  the 
upper  voussoirs  the  abacus  of  the  capital  forms  an  angle  with  these 
voussoirs,  as  indicated  in  the  detail  U ;  a  simple  stone  wedge  a  fills 
the  angle  between  the  abacus  and  the  voussoirs. 

It  is  here  that  we  perceive  the  fineness  of  observation  and  even 
subtlety  of  these  early  Gothic  builders. 

It  was  possible,  in  all  the  height  of  the  pier  from  A  to  E,  that 
some  settlement  might  occur,  and  by  reason  of  this  settlement 
the  top  S  of  the  great  flying-buttress  might  suffer,  and  exercise 
such  a  pressure  on  the  column  V,  that  this  latter  would  give  way,  or 
in  resisting,  would  cause  at  S'  a  rupture  fatal  to  the  safety  of  the 
arch. 

Placing  the  column  as  outlined  in  U,  the  lowering  of  the  summit 
of  the  flying-buttress  can  only  make  the  abacus  slip  a  little  under  the 
arch,  and  hence  bend  the  column  V  somewhat.  In  this  situation, 
resulting  from  a  settlement  of  the  great  buttress,  that  column  V 
would  press  upon  the  arch  Q,  and  push  against  the  pier  X  obliquely ; 
which  would  not  be  dangerous  since  that  pier  X  is  put  there  to  act 
obliquely ;  furthermore,  the  column  V,  would  bear  heavily  upon  the 
wall  of  the  triforium,  which  supports  it,  and  therefore  upon  the  ad- 
joining column  I,  an  important  point,  for  that  column  7,  a  monolith 
and  independent  of  the  pier  behind  it,  being  heavily  weighted  and 
unable  to  settle,  transfers  the  principal  pressure  of  the  pier  to  the 
outer  facing  A'  of  the  circumference  of  the  lower  column,  or,  in  other 
words,  upon  the  point  where  it  is  necessary  to  obtain  a  much  greater 


112 


FAULTS. 


rigidity,  to  prevent  the  effects  of  the  thrusts  from  the  vaults  of  the 
aisle. 

In  this  there  is  calculation  and  foresight ;  for  it  will  be  remarked 
that  the  engaged  column  1'  facing  that  at  /,  is  built  in  courses  like 
the  pier  X  ;  it  was,  in  fact,  important  that  this  intermediate  pier  X 
should  not  have  the  rigidity  of  the  inner  pier,  and  that  it  should  be 


Fig.  44. 


able  to  yield  to  the  settlement  in  order  not  to  cause  a  rupture  from 
0  to  L,  if  the  large  buttress  should  settle  down,  a  thing  which  could 
not  fail  to  take  place. 

Accordingly  then,  in  this  construction  the  two  systems  of  preven- 
tive and  opposed  resistances,  explained  in  our  two  figures  (40  and  406) 
are  simultaneously  employed. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


113 


All  this  may  be  subtle,  too  subtle,  we  grant ;  but  as  to  being  coarse 
or  barbaric,  it  certainly  is  not. 

The  builders  of  that  time  experimented  incessantly,  and  routine 
gained  no  hold  upon  them.  In  experimenting,  they  discovered, 
they  went  forward  and  never  said  "  We  are  at  the  goal,  let  us 
stop  here."  This,  it  seems  to  us,  is  a  sufficiently  good  doctrine  to 
follow.  We  to-day  wish  an  architecture  for  our  own  time,  a  new 
architecture ;  it  is  very  well  to  wish  it.  But  we  must  know  how  to 
find  a  new  architecture.  It  is  not  to  be  done,  apparently,  by  for- 
bidding the  study  of  that  art  which  is  most  fertile  in  resources  of 
all  kinds,  most  supple  and  most  free  in  the  use  of  material  means. 

Nevertheless  a  difficulty  arose,  serious  enough  and  wholly  new, 
when  they  came  to  the  vaults  of  double  aisles  surrounding  chancels 
of  great  extent.  The  examples  that  we  have  just  given  belong 
wholly  to  edifices  of  moderate  dimensions,  and  we  see  that  at  Saint 
Remy  of  Rheims,  and  in  the  Church  of  Notre  Dame  at  Chalons,  for 
instance,  the  outer  boundary  contains  a  greater  number  of  supports, 
than  the  one  within,  in  order  to  avoid  too  great  openings  between 
the  arches. 

In  a  choir  like  that  of  the  cathedral  of  Paris,  surrounded  by 
double  aisles,  it  was  necessary  to  arrange  the  piers  in  such  a  manner 
as  to  make  the  openings  of  the  transverse  arches  nearly  equal,  in 
order  to  obtain  vaults  whose  keys  should  all  reach  the  same  level. 
The  two  outer  boundaries  ought,  then,  to  contain  a  greater  number 
of  piers  than  the  boundary  of  the  chancel.  In  the  cathedral  of 
Paris,  in  fact,  we  see  (Fig.  44),  that  the  circular  part  of  the  chancel, 
built  about  1165,  rests  upon  six  piers,  while  the  second  boundary 
contains  eleven,  and  the  third  fourteen.  Thanks  to  that  arrange- 
ment the  archivolts  A  B,  B  C,  etc.,  the  transverse  arches  D  E,  E  F, 
etc.,  G  H,  H  I,  I P,  etc.,  are  fixed  on  almost  equal  diameters,  and 
the  vaults  connecting  these  arches  are  composed,  in  order  to  carry 
the  stone-filling,  of  only  the  simple  diagonal  arches  B  E,  E  C,  F  I, 
IE,  EH,  H D,  and  no  longer  of  intersecting  arches. 


114 


VAULTS. 


In  the  gallery  above  the  aisle  the  same  system  of  vaults  is  used, 
and  repeats  the  plan  of  the  first  boundary. 

Figure  X  gives  the  form  of  these  vaults  raised  upon  the  horizontal 
triangular  plan. 

The  large  buttresses  KJM,  alone  maintain  the  stability  of  the 
edifice ;  they  receive  the  flying-buttresses  of  the  great  upper 
vaults,  and  the  small  flying-buttresses  of  the  gallery  above  the 

aisle,  sprung  from  G  to  D,  and  from  P 
to  F,  etc.  As  to  the  thrusts  of  the 
two  diagonals,  B  E  and  C  E,  of 
the  vault  of  that  gallery,  they  are 
resisted  by  two  little  flying-buttresses 
stretched  from  /  to  E}  and  from  H 
to  E.  So  that  the  principal  thrusts 
and  weights  are  thrown  upon  the 
large  outer  piers  K  J  M,  and  the  secondary  thrusts  and  weights 
upon  the  intermediate  exterior  piers  0  R  S.1 

In  the  interior,  monocylindrical  columns  alone  support,  on  the 
ground-floor,  this  vast,  tall  edifice  and  rather  complicated  in  the  com- 
bination of  its  vaults.  There  is  no  need  of  being  very  expert  in 
architecture  to  recognize,  by  merely  glancing  at  Figure  44,  that  the 
evident  intention  of  the  master-builder  was  to  occupy  with  his  sup- 
ports as  little  space  as  possible  in  the  interior,  and  that  he  tried  at 
the  same  time  to  cover  the  two  aisles,  by  vaults  whose  summits 
should  all  be  on  the  same  level,  in  order  to  be  able  to  place  upon 
these  vaults  the  floor  of  a  gallery  and  flagging  having  a  regular 
slope  toward  the  outer  perimeter. 

A  little  after  the  building  of  that  apse,  the  constructors,  however, 
brought  the  piers  A,  B,  C,  nearer  together,  in  such  a  way  as  to 
obtain  around  the  chancel  narrower  divisions  than  those  parallel 
to  the  axis,  and  they  made  the  archivolts  A  B  and  B  C  still  higher ; 

1  It  is  understood  that  we  are  speaking  here  only  of  the  early  construction  of 
the  choir  of  Notre  Dame  at  Paris,  before  the  construction  of  the  radiating  chapels. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


115 


but  we  must  recognize  that  there  is  in  the  arrangement  of  the 
circular  space  in  Notre  Dame  at  Paris  an  amplitude  and  freedom  of 
conception  very  attractive  to  us. 

The  vaults  are  skilfully  fixed  on  these  piers,  whose  number 
increases  at  every  boundary-line.  This  is  easily  done  without  effort 
and  without  experiment.  Let  us  notice  also  that  the  Gothic  vaults 
alone  permitted  the  use  of  this  method,  and  that  the  first  architects 
who  applied  it  in  their  building  were  at  once  able  to  reap  its  full 
benefit. 

In  the  course  of  twenty-five  years  the  architects  of  the  end  of  the 
twelfth  century  had  arrived  at  the  results  which  had  occupied  their 
predecessors  during  the  Romanesque  period,  namely  :  the  vaulting 
of  large  and  high  buildings,  while  retaining  within  only  slender  sup- 
ports. The  triumph  of  the  construction  balanced  by  the  opposition 
of  thrusts  and  the  addition  of  weights  above,  reducing  these  thrusts 
to  a  vertical  action  was  then  complete ;  and  it  remained  only  to  sim- 
plify and  perfect  the  means  of  execution.  This  was  done  by  the 
builders  of  the  thirteenth  century,  often  with  too  great  boldness  and 
reliance  on  their  principle  of  equilibrium,  but  always  with  intelli- 
gence. It  was  evident  that  sagacity  was  the  dominant  quality  of 
the  apostles  of  the  new  school.  Their  efforts  tended  unceasingly 
towards  excelling  the  preceding  work,  toward  carrying  the  conse- 
quences of  the  conceded  principle  even  to  abuse ;  so  much  so, 
indeed,  that  there  was  a  reaction  during  the  fourteenth  century,  and 
the  buildings  where  the  problems  of  equilibrium  are  solved  with  the 
greatest  boldness  are  those  which  were  erected  during  the  latter 
half  of  the  thirteenth  century.  We  shall  have  occasion  to  return  to 
this  fact. 

If  one  wishes  to  determine  the  utmost  limit  to  which  the  architects 
at  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century  arrived,  in  the  matter  of  lightness 
of  interior  supports,  and  stability  obtained  by  means  of  the  equilib- 
rium of  opposing  forces,  he  must  visit  the  chancel  in  the  church  of 
Saint  Leu  d'Esserent  (Oise). 


116 


VAULTS. 


Certain  parts  of  this  building,  raised  about  1190,  are  calculated  to 
arouse  our  astonishment.  This  chancel  is  composed,  in  circular  form, 
of  four  monolithic  columns,  two  thick  and  two  slender,  arranged  as 
in  Figure  45. 

The  two  columns  A  are  only  50  centimetres  in  diameter,  those  at 
B  being  about  85  centimetres. 

A  perspective  view  of  the  two  bays  upon  a  circular  plan,  and  rest- 
ing on  the  columns  A  (Fig.  456),  clearly  shows  us  after  what  we 
have  just  said,  that  the  builders  then  relied  only  upon  the  equilib- 
rium of  acting  and  resisting  forces,  in  order  to  sustain  such  a  mass 
upon  so  slender  a  support. 

We  notice  the  column  A,  50  centimetres  in  diameter,  crowned  by 
an  extremely  broad  capital  (see  Chapiteau,  Fig.  21),  on  which  rest  a 
powerful  skew-back  and  the  three  monolithic  pillars  carrying  the  ex- 
tremities of  the  upper  vaults. 

The  skew-back  is  broad  enough  to  receive  the  pier  of  the  triforium 
and  the  wall  which  encloses  it. 

The  exterior  flying-buttress  pushes  the  whole  construction  from 
without  inwards,  and  the  more  the  flying-buttress  bears  upon  the  top 
of  the  pier,  the  firmer  footing  does  the  construction  obtain. 

The  enormous  weight  that  the  column  A  receives  vertically, 
ensures  its  stability.  The  equilibrium  cannot  be  broken,  and,  in 
fact,  this  apse  has  undergone  no  movement. 

In  Ile-de-F ranee,  however,  the  architects  were  able  to  keep  within 
a  certain  limit,  and  never  fell  into  the  exaggerations  so  frequent 
among  the  architects  of  Champagne  and  Burgundy.  Among  the 
latter  these  exaggerations  were  justified  up  to  a  certain  point  by 
the  excellent  quality  of  the  materials  of  that  province,  and  the  Bur- 
gundian  architects,  trusting  to  the  extraordinary  resistance  of  their 
stones,  produced  works  of  great  importance  from  the  builder's  point 
of  view,  in  that  they  show  us  how  far  the  application  of  the  Gothic 
principle  can  go  when  matter  comes  to  its  aid. 

The  vault  being  henceforth  the  generator  of  all  the  parts  of 


Fig.  456. 


118  VAULTS. 


Figs.  46  and  466. 

vaulted  edifices,  and  governing  the  size,  form,  and  arrangement 
of  the  supports,  it  is  this  that  we  ought  scrupulously  to  study  first. 
For  one  who  understands  clearly  the  structure  of  the  Gothic 


CONSTRUCTION. 


119 


vault,  and  the  infinite  resources  that  its  construction  presents,  all 
the  other  parts  of  the  masonry  are  naturally  deduced.    Our  readers 
have  already  been  able  to  gain  acquaintance  with  the  elements  of 
vault-building ;  it  remains  to  examine  the 

A  B 

details,  the  varieties  and  the  improvements, 
for  we  cannot  make  ourselves  clear  unless, 
before  going  farther,  the  different  means 
used  to  close  the  Gothic  vaults  are  com- 
pletely shown. 

Figures  27,  28,  28b  and  29  show  how  the 
lower  beds  of  the  abutments  of  arches  on 
the  abacus  of  the  capital  are  drawn,  and 
how  these  lower  beds  govern  the  form  of 
the  abacus  and  the  position  of  the  pillars 
and  supports. 

We  easily  recognize  that  in  the  first 
designs  of  Gothic  vaults  the  builders  have 
avoided,  as  far  as  possible,  letting  the  arches 
intersect  one  another  at  their  origin  ;  they 
had  each  voussoir  cut  out  according  to  the 
section  given  to  each  of  the  arches,  and  they 
tried  to  arrange  them  as  best  they  could 
upon  the  abacus,  trimming  them  off  at  the 
end  to  adapt  their  form  to  the  intersec- 
tions. Thus,  for  instance,  having  outlined 
upon  the  abacus  of  the  capitals  designed 
to  receive  a  transverse  arch,  two  diagonal 
arches,  and  the  two  pillars  carrying  the 
wall-arches,  the  bed  of  these  different 
members,  they  fixed  the  voussoirs  of  each  of  these  arches  and  the 
bases  of  the  pillars  as  seen  in  Figure  46,  cutting  off  the  corners  if 
necessary  of  the  extremities  of  these  arches,  as  seen  at  A,  in  order  to 
place  them  side  by  side  and  fit  them  into  their  proper  bed.  This 


Fig.  47. 


120 


VAULTS. 


naive  method  required  on  the  part  of  the  designer  no  special  plan  for 
the  abutment,  but  it  demanded  a  large  enough  space  on  the  abacus 
not  to  reduce  too  much  the  ends  of  the  voussoirs,  and  hence  very 
broad  capitals ;  furthermore  it  had  the  disadvantage  of  giving  only 
skew-backs  without  resistance,  which  might  give  way  under  their 
load,  and  extend  the  effects  of  the  thrusts  still  farther,  or  bring  their 
resultant  near  the  outer  facings.  Given  three  arches  to  establish,  the 
most  natural  idea  was  to  allow  them  each  a  skew-back.  But  in 
certain  cases  the  early  Gothic  builders  had  been  forced,  however,  to 
permit  the  intersection  of  the  different  arches  sustaining  a  vault  upon 
a  single  isolated  column,  as  seen  in  Figure  42,  and  to  give  only  one 
skew-back  for  all  of  them ;  for  upon  these  narrow  imposts  it  was  no 
longer  possible  of  arranging  the  first  voussoirs  of  these  arches  as 
one  puts  together  the  pieces  in  a  game  of  patience  ;  that  would  be 
making  these  first  voussoirs  into  a  conglomeration  of  angles  without 
force  of  resistance.  Moreover,  it  was  necessary  that  the  first 
voussoirs  of  these  arches  (if  they  had  an  upper  pier  to  support), 
should  form  a  flat  bed,  or,  in  other  words,  present  actual  horizontal 
courses,  in  order  to  resist  the  pressure. 

Let,  for  instance  (Fig.  466)  be  a  pier,  A,  having  an  upper  pier,  B, 
to  support  above  a  vault,  C. 

If  the  arches  of  this  vault  are  all  independent  at  their  origin  and 
have  a  complete  extrados,  and  if  the  joints  of  the  first  voussoirs  are 
normal  to  the  curves,  it  is  clear  that  the  pier  B  will  not  rest  upon 
the  impost  E  F,  as  it  ought,  but  upon  the  slight  filling  G,  and,  ac- 
cordingly, its  stability  cannot  be  assured,  while  the  pressure  upon 
the  back  of  the  first  voussoirs  will  inevitably  cause  disorder,  rupture 
and  downfall.  Nevertheless,  this  was  the  method  employed  by  the 
last  Romanesque  architects,  and  it  often  had  disastrous  results.  In 
similar  cases  the  early  Gothic  architects  proceeded  differently. 

If  H  be  the  pier  bearing  an  upper  load,  K,  they  placed  as  many 
horizontal  courses,  one  upon  another,  as  were  necessary  to  give 
the  verticals  L  M  an  impost,  and  began   the  arching  of  the 


CONSTRUCTION. 


121 


voussoirs  normal  to  the  curves  only  when  these  curves  left  the  verti- 
cal surfaces  L  M. 

Up  to  a  certain  height,  then,  the  arches  consisted  of  a  series  of 
courses  with  horizontal  beds,  and  serving  as  corbels. 

These  builders  had  too  much  good  sense  to  think  of  the  ancones 
/,  which  can  never  be  well  arranged,  and  whose  beds  cannot  be  per- 
fectly filled  with  mortar,  and  they  preferred  to  adopt  the  corbels  out 
and  out.  These  had  a  further  advantage,  in  that  they  partly 
destroyed  the  effects  of  the  thrusts.  We  should  not  fail  to  say  here 
that  the  face  of  the  voussoirs,  or  skew-backs,  is  always  set  perpen- 
dicular to  the  upper  surface  of  the  corbel  on  the  capital,  as  the 
drawing  D,  Figure  46,  indicates ;  while  as  to  the  base  of  the  pillar 
carrying  the  wall-arch,  it  is  set  close  to  the  edge  of  the  abacus,  in 
order  that  the  surface  of  the  column  may  keep  perpendicular  to  the 
surface  of  the  corbel  of  the  capital.    (See  the  same,  Fig.  46.) 

From  the  time  when  it  was  admitted  that  one  could  place  at  the 
starting-point  of  vaults  a  series  of  courses  with  horizontal  beds 
for  superimposed  arches,  architects  no  longer  needed  to  spend  their 
time  in  finding  a  broad  enough  surface  on  the  abacus  of  capitals  to 
receive  the  voussoirs  of  several  adjoining  arches,  but  only  to  arrange 
that  these  arches  should  intersect  upon  the  smallest  possible  surface. 

Always  rigidly  following  out  their  courses  of  reasoning,  they 
recognized  alike  that  the  resistance  of  arches  in  the  vault  system 
newly  adopted  is  dependent  on  the  height  of  the  voussoirs,  and  not 
on  their  breadth,  and  that,  with  sections  equal  as  to  area,  a  voussoir 
made,  for  example,  as  indicated  in  A  (Fig.  47)  would  resist  pressure 
much  more  than  a  voussoir  made  according  to  the  outline  B.  Now, 
toward  the  beginning  of  the  second-half  of  the  twelfth  century,  the 
voussoirs  of  arches  were  generally  included  in  a  square  section  C, 
from  eight  inches  (22  centimetres)  to  a  foot  or  eighteen  inches  (33 
centimetres  to  50  centimetres)  in  the  depth,  according  to  the  breadth 
of  the  vault,  while,  toward  the  end  of  that  century,  if  the  voussoirs 
of  transverse  arches  still  kept  that  section,  those  of  diagonal  arches 


122 


VAULTS. 


(arches  whose  diameter  is  much  greater  still,  but  which  do  not 
have  to  resist  the  pressure  of  the  flying-buttress)  lost  a  part  of 
their  breadth  while  preserving  their  depth,  as  seen  in  D.  Hav- 
ing less  breadth  from  E  to  F,  their  outline  upon  the  abacus  of 
the  capitals  took  less  space  and  required  less  width,  while  adapting 
itself  better  to  the  intersections,  and  having  no  more  than  one  edge  at 
G,  or  a  simple  roll,  its  sloping  projection  upon  the  abacus  did  not 
present  the  awkward  and  troublesome  surfaces  given  by  the  arches 
whose  section  was  C. 

Little  by  little,  the  architects  renounced  that  section  C,  even  for 
transverse  arches,  and  adopted  sections  analogous  to  that  at  H,  offer- 
ing in  the  same  way  from  /  to  Zv  a  great  vertical  resistance,  and 
from  L  to  M  a  sufficient  resistance  of  base  to  avoid  the  torsion 
already  maintained  by  the  filling  of  the  vault. 

Thus  each  day,  or  rather  after  each  attempt,  the  architects  ar- 
rived at  the  suppression  of  everything  not  absolutely  indispensable 
to  the  solidity  of  the  vaults,  and  abandoned  the  last  Romanesque 
traditions  in  order  to  obtain  : 

1.  Increased  lightness  of  structure. 

2.  Facilities  for  laying  the  skeAv-backs,  since  these  skew-backs 
were  henceforth  to  govern  the  construction  of  the  piers,  and  hence 
of  all  the  lower  members  of  the  edifices. 

But  we  are  obliged,  at  the  risk  of  seeming  tedious  in  our  expla- 
nation of  the  Gothic  system  of  vaults,  to  proceed  like  the  builders  of 
that  time  and  to  follow,  without  leaving  it  for  an  instant,  the  march 
of  their  progress. 

When  these  builders  had  admitted  the  flying-buttress,  that  is  to 
say,  a  resistance  opposed  at  certain  points  to  the  thrusts  j^f  the 
vaults,  it  was  necessary  to  unite  these  thrusts  and  cause  their  result- 
ant to  act  only  just  upon  these  isolated  points.  Hence  it  was  of  the 
utmost  importance  that  the  transverse  and  the  diagonal  arches 
should  intersect  in  such  a  way  that :  First,  the  resultant  of  their 
thrusts  should  be  converted  into  a  single  pressure  at  the  point  where 


CONSTRUCTION. 


123 


the  top  of  the  flying-buttress  touched  ;  Second,  that  no  portion  of  the 
thrust  might  be  able  to  act  without,  or  by  the  side  of  that  resultant ; 
in  a  word,  so  that  the  collection  of  thrusts  might  be  directed  accu- 
rately in  one  and  the  same  line  of  pressure  at  the  moment  of  meeting 
the  flying-buttress  as  an  obstacle. 

Vaults  whose  skew-backs  were  arranged  according  to  Figure  46, 
could  not  attain  this  result  absolutely,  for  their  thrusts  must  be  and, 
in  fact,  are  scattered,  and  do  not  exactly  unite  in  a  resultant  whose 
direction  and  strength  can  be  exactly  determined.  But  if,  instead 
of  these  first  voussoirs  set  with  indifferent  success  beside  one  another 
on  the  abaci  of  the  capitals,  and  occupying  a  broad  surface  but  with- 
out any  solidarity  among  them,  we  suppose  a  skew-back  made  in  a 
single  course,  and  if  we  arrange  the  starting-point  of  the  arches  in 
such  a  way  that  they  will  entirely  intersect  and  make  one  single 
abutment  instead  of  three,  we  shall  have  taken  a  step  forward,  for 
the  resultant  of  the  different  pressures  will  act  upon  a  single  piece 
of  stone,  which  alone  will  need  to  be  made  immovable.  But  if,  again, 
not  content  with  this  first  result,  having  crowded  the  starting-points 
of  our  arches  into  as  small  a  group  as  possible,  we  consider  the  skew- 
backs  only  as  corbel  courses,  and  if  we  should  place  several  of  these 
courses  or  skew-backs  one  upon  another  with  their  beds  horizontal  until 
the  development  of  the  curves  of  each  of  these  arches  permits  us  to  dis- 
engage their,  voussoirs  from  that  mass  at  the  base  of  operations,  then 
we  shall  be  certain  of  having  at  the  base  of  our  vaults  a  resultant  of 
pressures  acting  along  a  line  whose  point  of  departure,  strength 
and  direction  we  cannot  precisely  estimate ;  furthermore,  we  shall 
feel  assured  that  the  top  of  the  flying-buttress  will  rest,  not  upon  a 
masonry  without  unity  and  without  strength,  but  against  a  rigid 
construction  presenting  a  homogeneous  surface,  as  would  be  the 
piece  of  timber  against  which  one  rests  the  end  of  a  prop.  But  we 
have  made  progress;  in  the  first  place,  we  have  recognized  that 
the  diagonal  arch  vaults  with  two  compartments,  that  is  to  say,  upon 
a  square  plan  whose  diagonals  are  cut  by  an  intermediate  transverse 


124 


VAULTS. 


arch,  oblige  us  to  give  to  the  vaults  a  very  convex  shape,  which 
makes  it  hard  for  us  to  lay  the  centering ;  for  the  diagonals  of  the 
square  being  much  longer  than  one  of  its  sides,  these  diagonals, 
serving  as  diameters  for  the  diagonal  arches,  raise  their  key-stones 
above  the  plane  of  starting  to  a  height  equal  to  half  this  diameter 
(see  Figs.  20,  20b  and  21),  a  height  that  the  key  of  our  transverse 
arches  cannot  attain,  unless  these  arches  be  made  very  acute. 

About  1230,  then,  they  gave 
up  this  kind  of  vault  upon  a 
square  plan,  and  established 
the  diagonal  arches  of  the 
naves  upon  an  oblong  plan,  or, 
in  other  words,  each  compart- 
ment had  its  complete  vault. 
We  can  thus  make  the  keys  of 
the  diagonal,  transverse  and  wall 
arches  reach  the  same  level  or 
nearly  so.  The  builders,  wishing 
to  have  skew-backs  with  horizon- 
tal beds  and  reaching  to  the  very  point  where  these  arches  cease  to 
intersect,  observe  that  the  simplest  method  to  prevent  any  difficulties 
in  drawing  the  outline  of  their  skew-backs,  consists  in  giving  the 
diagonal  and  the  transverse  arches  the  same  radius.  Given  a  vault 
upon  an  oblong  plan  (Fig.  48),  in  which  the  diagonal  arch  A  C  (in 
plan)  is  a  semicircle  ABC;  if  we  carry  the  semi-diameter  A  D 
around  upon  the  base-line  of  the  transverse  arch  A  E,  we  obtain  at 
F  the  centre  of  one  of  the  branches  of  the  transverse  arch,  and  we 
draw  the  arc  A  G,  which  possesses  the  same  radius  as  the  arc  A  B 
C ;  laying-off  the  distance  A  F  from  E  to  F\  we  obtain  at  F'  the 
second  centre  of  the  transverse  arch,  and  we  draw  the  second  branch 
E  G.  It  is  thus  that  the  arches  of  the  first  Gothic  vaults  upon  an 
oblong  plan  are  drawn.1 


Fig.  48. 


1It  will  be  remarked,  in  fact,  that  these  first  vaults  are  rather  flat,  compared 


CONSTRUCTION. 


125 


Fig.  48&. 


with  those  of  the  middle  of  the  thirteenth  century,  and  that  their  transverse 
arches  are  almost  semicircular.  Later  these  vaults  appeared  not  solid  enough  ; 
so  they  made  the  diagonal  arches  more  acute,  or  rather,  raised  their  starting- 
point,  in  order  to  be  able  to  raise  the  keys  of  the  transverse  arches. 


126 


VAULTS. 


Then  the  curves  of  the  diagonal  and  transverse  arches  being  the 
same,  their  cross-sections  are  similar,  and  their  skew-backs  present 
no  difficulty  of  outline. 

Let  us  now  see  about  outlining  these  skew-backs. 

Let  A  B  (Fig.  486)  be  the  directrix  of  the  transverse  arch  and 
A  C  the  directrices  of  the  diagonal  arches. 

A  is  fixed  at  the  surface  of  the  wall. 

From  this  point  A,  taking  upon  the  line  A  B,  a  distance  A  D 
equal  to  the  thickness  of  the  voussoir  of  the  transverse  arch,  and 
considering  A  D  as  a  radius,  we  describe  the  semicircle  D'  D  D". 

We  then  trace  the  section  of  the  transverse  arch  upon  the  horizontal 
plan. 

We  draw  two  parallels,  E  F,  to  the  directrices  A  C  of  the  diagonal 
arches,  leaving  between  these  parallels  a  space  equal  to  the  width  of 
the  voussoirs  of  the  diagonal  arches.  These  are  the  horizontal  pro- 
jections of  the  diagonal  arches. 

Taking  the  points  G  at  the  meeting  of  the  axis  of  the  diagonal 
arches  with  the  semicircle  D'  D  D",  as  the  intrados  of  the 
diagonal  arches,  we  draw  the  section  of  these  diagonal  arches  upon 
the  horizontal  plan. 

We  have  then  the  lower  bed  of  the  first  skew-back.  In  the  vacant 
spaces  that  remain  between  the  semicircle  D'  D  D"  and  the  diagonal 
arches  at  H,  we  place  the  pillars  which  are  destined  to  carry  the 
wall-arches. 

The  contour  of  the  lower  bed  of  the  first  skew-back  having  been 
obtained,  we  can  draw  (and  only  now)  the  abacus  of  the  capital, 
whether  in  a  re-entrant  square,  as  indicated  in  1  K  L,  or  in  star 
form,  as  indicated  in  I'  K'  L '. 

Under  these  abaci  one  can  put  only  a  single  capital  and  a  single 
column  M,  since  our  intention  is  to  unite  the  arches  as  far  as  possi- 
ble in  a  close  group. 

This  capital,  which  is  a  console,  a  stone  corbel  supported  by  the 
detached  column,  sends  out  three  corbels  from  a  single  astragal. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


127 


We  must  project  in  elevation  the  transverse  arch  upon  the  line 
N  0,  and  the  diagonal  arch  upon  the  line  A  C. 

It  is  clear  that  these  two  arches  will  cease  to  intersect  at  the 
point  P  upon  the  horizontal  projection.  From  the  point  P,  erect- 
ing a  perpendicular  P  P'  to  the  line  N  0,  the  base  of  the  transverse 
arch,  and  a  second  perpendicular  P  P"  to  the  line  A  C,  the  base  of 
the  diagonal  arch,  that  first  perpendicular  P  P'  will  meet  the 
extrados  of  the  projected  transverse  arch  at  Q. 

This  point  Q  shows  then,  the  height  at  which  the  transverse  arch 
is  disengaged  from  the  diagonal  arch.  It  is  the  level  of  the  bed 
of  the  last  skew-back. 

It  is  necessary  to  divide  the  height  P  Q  into  a  certain  number  of 
courses,  according  to  the  height  of  their  faces.  Let  us  suppose  that 
three  courses  are  enough ;  the  upper  bed  of  the  first  skew-back  will 
be  at  R,  the  second  at  S,  and  that  of  the  third  at  T.  At  Q,  the  arch 
disengages  itself  and  we  can  draw  the  first  section  Q  V  tending 
toward  the  centre  of  the  arch.  Starting  from  this  point,  the  vous- 
soirs,  whose  section  is  drawn  in  U,  are  independent.  It  will  be 
sufficient  to  proceed  in  the  same  way  with  the  diagonal  arch,  by 
drawing  the  beds  R'  S'  T',  beginning  at  the  base-line  A  C,  as  far 
apart  from  one  another  as  are  the  beds  R  S  T.  The  diagonal  arch 
being  less  thick  than  the  transverse  arch,  there  will  remain  behind 
its  extrados  at  Q',  up  to  the  point  of  intersection  with  the  extrados 
of  the  transverse  arch,  a  little  space  of  horizontal  bed  that  will  be 
very  useful  for  beginning  to  lay  the  filling-stones  of  the  triangles  of 
the  vaults.  This  done  we  can  give  up  to  the  head  workman  each  of 
the  beds  of  the  skew-backs,  drawing  off  upon  a  horizontal  plan,  as 
out-lined  in  X,  the  sections  that  the  beds  R  S  Tand  R'  S'  V,  give  in 
the  projected  arches.  . 

Then  we  obtain  :  1st,  at  a  the  lower  bed  of  the  first  skew-back, 
already  drawn  as  the  origin  of  the  arches ;  2d,  at  b  the  upper  bed  of 
the  first  skew-back,  which  gives  the  lower  bed  of  the  second ;  3d, 
at  c  the  lower  bed  of  the  third  skew-back  ;  4th,  at  e  the  upper  bed  of 


128 


VAULTS. 


this  third  skew-back  with  its  bent  sections  marked  at  d.  There  is 
no  need  to  say  that  at  least  the  first  two  of  these  skew-backs,  if  not 
all  of  them,  are  fastened  at  the  rear  into  the  wall  whose  surface  is 
Y  Z.  Should  we  wish  to  crowd  the  diagonal  arches  still  more  against 
the  transverse  arch,  it  would  suffice,  in  beginning  the  work,  to  bring 
the  axis  of  the  diagonal  arches,  on  the  horizontal  plan,  nearer  to  the 
points.  Often  these  axes  even  meet  at  the  point  A.  In  order  not 
to  complicate  the  figure  uselessly,  we  have  supposed  the  arches  to 
be  plainly  moulded ;  but  if  they  are  made  with  elaborate  mouldings 
we  should  proceed  in  the  same  way  upon  the  working-drawing, 
except  in  outlining  the  contours  ;  for  it  is  necessary  to  know,  upon 
the  different  horizontal  beds  of  the  skew-backs,  the  sloping  sections 
which  are  made  upon  these  contours,  in  order  to  furnish  the  stone- 
cutter with  moulds  which  provide  for  the  more  or  less  perceptible 
change  of  form  of  the  mouldings  at  each  bed. 

To  make  intelligible,  even  to  persons  who  are  not  familiar  with 
descriptive  geometry,  the  operation  that  we  have  just  described,  let 
us  suppose  (Fig.  48c)  the  three  skew-backs  of  the  preceding  figure 
to  be  seen  one  above  another  in  perspective  and  with  their  mouldings. 

At  A  we  see  the  first  skew-back,  at  B  the  second,  at  C  the  third 
with  its  sections  normal  to  the  curves  of  the  arches,  at  D  the  vous- 
soirs  of  the  transverse  arches,  and  at  D'  those  of  the  diagonal  arches 
separated  from  the  skew-backs  and  henceforth  similar  to  one  another 
as  far  as  the  keystone. 

It  sometimes  happens  that  the  arches  of  a  vault  are  of  very 
unequal  diameter,  or  that  they  start  from  different  heights;  this 
cannot  trouble  the  workman  in  any  respect,  for  at  the  point  where 
one  of  these  arches  disengages  itself  from  the  others  at  the  extrados, 
he  makes  a  section  normal  to  its  curve  and  the  voussoirs  are  laid  in, 
while  the  other  arches  beside  it  can  still  remain  united  up  to  a 
certain  height,  and  keep  the  beds  of  the  skew-backs  horizontal. 

Thus,  for  instance  (Fig.  49),  let  us  suppose  that  we  have  to  vault 
a  hall  divided  by  a  row  of  piers,  whose  plan  at  one  of  its  extremities 


130 


VAULTS. 


gives  us,  between  the  piers  A  and  B,  a  space  much  larger  than  that 
remaining  between  the  pier  B  and  the  wall  C  D.  Hence  we  shall 
have  diagonal  arch  vaults,  just  as  our  figure  indicates. 

We  project  the  transverse  arch,  E  F,  which  gives  us  the  diagonal 
arch  E  G  F ;  we  project  the  diagonal  arch  E  L  which  gives  us  the 
slightly  broken  arch  E  H  I;  we  project  the  diagonal  arch  K  L, 
which  gives  us  the  semicircle  KL  M ;  and  lastly  project  the  trans- 
verse arch  P  N,  drawing  this  arch  in  such  a  way  that  its  key  may 
be  a  little  below  the  level  of  the  key  of  the  diagonal  arch  K  L,  and 
that  its  curve  may  be  almost  semicircular,  in  order  to  lead  the  eye, 

without  abrupt  changes 
$  of  level,  from  the  great 
vaults  included  between 
A  and  B  to  the  narrower 
and  lower  vaults  in- 
cluded between  the  pier 
B  and  the  wall  C  D. 

It  is  desirable,  accord- 
ingly, to  raise  the  origin 
of  that  transverse  arch 
i>  PN  still  higher.  It  is 
projected  in  P  0  N.  It 
is  this  need  of  avoiding 
abrupt  changes  of  level  in  the  different  arches  which  has  made 
us  raise  somewhat  the  key  of  the  diagonal  arch  E  I  above  the 
semicircular.  It  is  seen  thus  that  from  the  great  transverse  arch 
included  between  the  pier  B  and  the  wall  the  keys  R,  M,  0,  H,  and 
G,  whether  of  the  transverse  or  the  diagonal  arches,  are  successively 
lowered  by  an  almost  imperceptible  transition  in  their  execution. 

We  must  now  imagine  the  skew-backs  of  the  various  arches  upon 
the  capital  of  the  pier  B,  and  in  Figure  496  we  present  the  forms  of 
these  skew-backs.  At  A  is  the  skew-back  of  the  transverse  arch 
marked  E  F  upon  the  preceding  figure ;  at  B  the  second  skew-back 


Fig.  49. 


Fig.  496. 


132 


VAULTS. 


with  the  two  sections  of  the  diagonal  arch  EI;  at  C,  the  third  skew- 
back  whose  upper  bed  is  entirely  horizontal ;  and  at  D,  the  fourth 
skew-back  with  the  sections  of  the  two  transverse  arches  P  N,  of 
the  two  diagonal  arches  K  L,  and  of  the  transverse  arch  connecting 
the  pier  A  with  the  pier  B.  One  will  notice  the  supports  R  which 
are  left  in  the  courses  of  the  skew-backs,  behind  the  free  voussoirs, 
to  receive  the  stone  filling  of  the  vaults.  We  have  then  :  the  first 
skew-back,  bearing  the  section  of  one  arch ;  the  second  skew-back, 
bearing  the  sections  of  two  arches;  the  third  skew-back,  with 
horizontal  upper  bed,  bearing  no  sections;  and  the  fourth  skew- 
back,  bearing  the  sections  of  five  arches. 

These  methods  give  much  liberty  to  the  builders,  and  there  is  no 
surface,  however  irregular  it  may  be,  that  cannot  be  covered  with 
ease.  More  than  that,  the  system  of  vaults  with  diagonal  arches 
allows  the  vaulting  of  halls,  whose  openings  for  instance,  are  taken 
at  very  different  heights,  or  the  building  of  vaults  very  much  inclined. 

For  instance,  let  us  suppose  a  hall  (Fig.  49c)  whose  perimeter  is 
the  quadrilateral  A  B  C  D.  We  must  make  upon  the  side  A  B  a 
clear  space  ten  metres  high,  without  raising  the  keys  of  the  wall- 
arches  upon  the  sides  B  C  and  A  D  to  more  than  six  metres  or  the 
key  of  the  wall-arch  upon  the  side  C  D  to  more  than  four  metres. 

The  side  C  D  being  eight  metres  long,  upon  that  side  C  D  we  shall 
outline  a  semicircular  wall-arch  whose  starting-point  shall  be  fixed 
on  the  very  ground ;  and  on  the  other  sides  we  shall  outline  our  wall- 
arches  as  we  may  prefer,  whether  pointed  or  semicircular. 

Dividing  the  four  lines  A  B,  B  C,  A  D,  D  C,  each  into  two  equal 
parts,  we  connect  the  middle  points  G,  II,  I,  K,  by  two  lines  whose 
meeting  at  F  gives  the  horizontal  projection  of  the  key  of  the 
pointed  or  diagonal  arches. 

Erecting  the  vertical  F  E,  we  take  upon  that  line  the  height  at 
which  is  to  be  placed  the  key  L,  and  then  we  draw  the  circular 
arcs  A  L,  B  L,  C  L,  D  L,  which  are  the  half  arches  whose  horizontal 
projections  are  on  A  F,  B  F,  C  F,  D  F. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


133 


Fig.  49c. 


134 


VAULTS. 


Upon  the  frame-work  of  the  wall-arches  and  the  diagonal  arches, 
there  is  nothing  else  to  do  beyond  making  the  fillings  of  the  vaults, 
whose  intersections  or  keys  are  represented  by  the  dotted  lines 
M  N,  OP,  QR,  S  T,  account  being  taken  of  the  thickness  of  the 
voussoirs  of  the  diagonal  and  the  wall  arches,  and  the  central  key 
being  supposed  to  be  fixed. 

But  we  shall  at  once  attend  to  these  fillings  and  the  manner  of 
making  them.  Whatever  be  the  plan  of  the  surface  to  be  covered, 
the  problem  to  be  solved  is  always  this :  First,  to  cause  this  surface  to 
be  divided  by  the  diagonal  arches  so  as  to  present  a  series  of  tri- 
angles, for  with  this  system  of  vaults,  one  can  cover  only  triangles; 


Fig.  51.  .  Fig.  516. 


Second,  to  arrange  the  diagonal  arches  (ogives)  in  such  a  manner 
that  these  arches  buttress  one  another  reciprocally  at  their  summit, 
and  that  one  or  more  of  them  cannot  press  upon  the  others  so  as  to 
put  them  out  of  shape. 

Thus,  to  cover  a  hall  in  the  shape  of  a  polygon,  of  five,  six,  seven, 
eight,  ten  or  twelve  sides,  or  even  more,  it  is  naturally  sufficient  to 
connect  the  inner  angles  of  the  polygon  by  lines  meeting  in  the 
centre,  as  indicated  by  Figure  50. 

These  lines  are  horizontal  projections  of  the  diagonal  arches,  and 
the  sides  of  the  polygons  are  those  of  the  wall-arches,  which  may 
have  their  keys  above  or  below  the  level  of  the  central  key,  accord- 
ing as  necessity  directs.    If  it  is  necessary  to  cover  a  portion  of  a 


CONSTRUCTION. 


135 


polygon  at  the  end  of  a  parallelogram,  as  we  sometimes  find  in  the 
chancels  of  churches,  for  instance  (Fig.  51),  we  shall  arrange  to 
have,  in  front  of  the  broken  part  B  C  a  compartment  A  B,  equal 
to  one  of  the  sides  of  the  polygon  B  C,  in  order  that  the  key  D  may 
be  equally  distant  from  the  points  B,  C,  E,  etc.,  and  that  the  tri- 
angles BCD,  CED,  may  have  their  sides  B  D,  CD,  ED,  all 
equal.  In  this  case  the  arches  A  D  buttress  the  arches  B  D,  CD, 
E  D,  etc.,  and  we  always  have  only  triangles  to  fill.  Still  there  are 
exceptions  to  this  rule,  and  one  sees  arches  radiating  from  apses  and 
buttressing  their  summits  against  the  apex  of  a  transverse  arch 
(Fig.  516),  when,  for  instance,  the  apse-plan  is  a  half  of  a  dodecagon  ; 
but  this  method  is  a  bad  one,  since  the  arches  all  pressing  upon  the 
unsupported  key  D'  can  make  the  transverse  arch  G  H  yield.  In 
this  case,  experienced  builders  have  fixed  two  branches  ID'  and 
R  D'  of  a  diagonal  arch,  destined  as  a  powerful  buttress  for  the  key 
D'.  But  if  these  vaults  can  be  built  by  means  of  arches  whose  keys 
are  upon  different  levels,  they  can  also  be  built  upon  arches  of  very 
different  diameters,  whose  keys  are  all  upon  the  same  level.  It  is 
sometimes  necessary  to  level  the  keys,  if,  for  instance,  the  case  is 
one  of  a  vault  having  a  floor  above  it;  this  case  frequently  occurs  in 
porches  surmounted  by  galleries  or  halls  above  the  aisle. 

The  porch  of  the  church  of  Notre  Dame  at  Dijon  is  one  of  the 
best  examples  that  we  could  choose.  Its  plan  (Fig.  52),  follows 
the  plan  of  the  nave  and  aisles  of  the  church  itself,  but  the  central 
vault,  instead  of  being  higher,  as  in  the  church,  has  its  keys  at  the 
level  of  the  vaults  of  the  aisles,  for  it  is  necessary  to  receive  on 
the  upper  story  a  paving  at  the  same  level  on  the  whole  surface  of 
the  porch.  Wishing  to  give  solidity  to  the  facade,  the  builder  has 
doubled  the  piers  at  this  point,  and  has  built  parallel  transverse 
arches,  separated  by  a  cradle-vault,  from  A  to  B,  from  E  to  G,  from 
B'  to  C,  from  G'  to  H,  from  A'  to  D,  and  from  E'  to  F. 

Next,  the  central  part  of  the  porch  is  covered  by  a  vault  on 
diagonal  arches  G  K  and  E  I,  crossed  by  a  transverse  arch  L  M. 


136 


VAULTS. 


The  aisles  are  vaulted  with  diagonal  arches  on  a  square  plan. 
We  have  given  upon  our  plan  the  projection  of  all  these  arches, 
whose  keys  are  fixed  upon  this  same  horizontal  plane.  The  diameters 
of  these  arches,  being  of  very  different  lengths,  it  is  impossible  to 
have  the  arches  start  from  capitals  placed  all  on  the  same  level. 
Accordingly,  the  capitals  of  the  diagonal  arches,  G  K  and  E  I  and 
of  the  transverse  arches  E  G,  L  M,  I K,  are  set  lower  than  those  of 


Fig.  52.    Porch  of  Notre  Dame,  Dijon,  France. 


the  arches  G  M,  M  I,  E  L,  L  K  and  the  diagonal  arches  of  the 
aisles. 

If  we  then  give  a  perspective  view  of  the  pier  M  (Fig.  53),  we  see 
that  the  transverse  arch  A  starts  from  below  the  other  arches  and 
that  its  capital  B  conforms,  by  its  position,  to  that  difference  of  level. 
The  drums  of  the  pier  carry  the  two  skew-backs  C  and  D  of  the 
transverse  arch  M  L  (in  the  plan)  which  disengages  itself  below  the 
capitals  of  the  other  arches.     As  to  these  other  arches,  they  rest 


CONSTRUCTION.  137 

their  skew-backs  upon  a  group  of  capitals  sustained  by  monolithic 
pillars.     The  effects  of  the  unequal  thrusts  acting  at  different 


Fig.  53.    From  the  Porch  of  Notre  Dame,  Dijon,  France. 

heights  on  the  arches  are  neutralized  by  the  vertical  weights  carried 
by  the  piers,  for  these  weights  are  considerable. 

As  far  back  as  the  middle  of  the  thirteenth  century,  in  England, 


138 


VAULTS. 


they  reached  very  skilful  and  highly  developed  combinations  of 
arches  in  vaults. 

The  Normans  quickly  became  clever  builders  and  their  structures 
of  the  Romanesque  period  are  remarkable  for  the  great  indepen- 
dence and  the  exceptionally  perfect  execution  therein  displayed. 

Even  as  early  as  the  beginning  of  the  twelfth  century,  they  were 
building  vaults  with  diagonal  or  pointed  arches  having  projecting 
ribs,  while  in  France,  they  built  only  Roman  groined  vaults,  without 
diagonal  arches,  but  having  curved  surfaces  in  every  direction,  as  we 


2 

Fig.  54.    Pier  in  Choir  Aisle,  Peterborough  Cathedral. 


have  previously  seen.  They  knew  the  advantage  to  be  gained  from 
the  skew-backs  and  they  divided  their  capitals,  if  not  the  vertical  sup- 
ports, into  as  many  members  as  they  had  arches  to  maintain.  Thus, 
in  the  Romanesque  part  of  the  Cathedral  of  Peterborough,  the  vaults 
of  the  aisles  of  the  choir,  which  open  into  the  transepts,  are,  for  that 
period,  conceived  and  executed  with  more  wisdom  and  precision 
than  those  in  the  royal  domain  of  France,  in  Champagne,  in  Bur- 
gundy, or  in  the  central  part.  These  vaults  rest  upon  piers,  alter- 
nately cylindrical  and  prismatic,  set  with  their  angles  upon  the  axes. 


Figs.  546  and  54c.    Pier  in  Choir  Aisle,  Peterborough  Cathedral. 


140 


VAULTS. 


The  capitals  extend  the  section  of  the  piers  to  the  lower  bed  of  the 
various  arches  by  means  of  corbels  skilfully  combined. 

Figure  54  presents  the  horizontal  section  ABCDEFGHoi 
a  pier,  the  plan  I K  L  M  N  0  P  of  the  abaci  of  the  capital,  the  out- 
line upon  these  abaci  of  the  lower  bed  of  the  transverse  arch  Q,  the 
archivolts  R  carrying  the  walls  of  the  transept,  the  diagonal  arches  S 
and  the  base  of  the  engaged  column  T  which  rises  up  to  the  trusses 
above,  covering  the  principal  interior  space.  In  order  that  the  keys 
of  the  diagonal  arches  over  the  aisles  should  not  extend  beyond  the 
level  of  the  extrados  of  the  archivolts  and  transverse  arches,  which 
are  semicircular,  these  diagonal  arches  are  drawn  upon  an  arc  less 
than  a  semicircle. 

(Fig.  54&)  shows  in  perspective  this  capital  and  the  terminations 
of  the  arches,  while  at  A  is  seen  a  branch  of  a  diagonal  arch. 

The  geometrical  drawing  (Fig.  54c)  explains  the  origin  of  that 
branch  of  the  diagonal  arch  A,  the  skew-backs  of  all  the  arches  and 
the  corbels  of  the  capital. 

When  we  compare  this  structure  with  those  that  are  contempo- 
raneous with  it  in  France  proper,  we  are  astonished  at  the  wisdom 
and  the  experience  of  the  Norman  architects,  who,  at  the  beginning 
of  the  twelfth  century,  were  already  able  to  construct  vaults  on 
diagonal  arches  and  arranged  the  capitals  in  as  many  members 
as  they  had  arches  to  receive.  But  before  following  the  rapid 
progress  of  the  Anglo-Norman  vault  and  exhibiting  the  singular 
results  to  which  the  architects  beyond  the  Channel  arrived,  toward 
the  middle  of  the  thirteenth  century,  we  must  first  examine  the  means 
used  by  French  builders  to  close  the  triangles  of  the  Gothic  vaults. 
The  general  principle  must  precede  the  varieties  and  the  exceptions. 

Let  Figure  55  be  the  plan  of  a  vault  with  diagonal  arches  covered 
by  a  transverse  arch,  according  to  the  method  of  the  first  Gothic 
builders,  A  B  being  the  semi-diameter  of  the  principal  transverse 
arch,  A  C  the  semi-diameter  of  the  diagonal  arch,  A  D  the  wall-arch 
and  D  C  the  semi-diameter  of  the  transverse  arch  cutting  the  tri- 


CONSTRUCTION.  HI 

angle  A  E  C  into  two  equal  parts.  The  wall-arch  must  be  our  first 
consideration. 

Let  us  suppose  the  stones  manageable,  so  that  a  mason  can  easily 


r 


6 

Fig.  5  5. 

lay  them  by  hand  and  let  them  have  the  width  X  X'  (a  width  vary- 
ing from  .08  centimetres  to  .15  centimetres  in  this  sort  of  building). 
We  project  the  extrados  of  all  the  arches  upon  a  horizontal  plane 


142 


VAULTS. 


These  projected  figures  give  us  for  the  wall-arch,  with  its  stilt,  the 
broken  curved.  F  D;  for  the  principal  transverse  arch,  the  broken 
curve  EG;  for  the  diagonal  arch,  the  exact  circular  quadrant  A  I ; 
for  the  intersecting  transverse  arch,  the  broken  curve  D  H. 

Let  us  not  forget  that,  the  diagonal  arch  being  semicircular,  the 
intersecting  transverse  arch  must  have  a  radius  C  H  equal  to 
the  radius  CI;  that,  in  ordinary  cases,  the  principal  transverse 
arch  must  have  a  radius  J  G  shorter  than  the  radius  C  I  and  that 
the  wall-arch  must  have  with  its  stilt,  a  radius  K  F  shorter  than 
that  of  the  principal  transverse  arch. 

The  width  of  the  sofRtes  of  the  filling  being  X  X',  we  must  find 
out  how  many  times  the  extrados  of  the  half-wall-arch  A  F,  includ- 
ing its  rise,  contains  X  X' ;  suppose  it  to  be  four  times ;  then  we 
mark  the  dividing  points  L,  M,  N.    So  we  have  four  rows  of  stones.1 

Referring  the  wall-arch  back  upon  its  horizontal  projection  A  D, 
the  point  N  taken  upon  the  vertical  part  of  the  wall-arch  falls  on  N', 

the  point  M  on  M ',  the  point 

 -1 — ■  L  on  L'  and  the  point  F  of 

C  aj  IK*    tne  key  on  K.    We  then  divide 

A  I,  the  half  of  the  extrados 

Fig.  56. 

of  the  diagonal  arch,  into  four 
parts  and  mark  the  points  0,  P,  Q.  Referring  that  curve  back  in 
the  same  way  upon  its  horizontal  projection  A  C,  we  obtain  upon 
that  arch  the  points  0',  P',  Q',  C. 

We  proceed,  in  the  same  manner  with  the  intersecting  transverse 
arch  D  C,  whose  projected  extrados  is  D  H.  We  divide  that  extra- 
dos into  four  parts  and  mark  the  points  R,  S,  T. 

Revolving  the  arch  upon  its  radius  D  C,  we  obtain  in  horizontal 

projection  the  points  R',  S',  T,  C.    Then  joining  the  point  N'  to 

the  point  0' ;  M'  to  P' ;  L'  to  Q',  K  to  C,  etc.,  by  straight  lines, 

these  lines  give  us  the  horizontal  projection  of  the  vertical  planes 

1  In  order  not  to  complicate  the  figure  we  suppose  a  very  limited  number  of 
divisions  of  the  soffite.  The  operation  is  the  same,  whatever  be  the  division  of 
the  soffite. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


143 


through  which  the  intrados  sections  of  the  end  stones  must  pass. 
This  being  obtained,  the  principal  transverse  arch  governs  the  num- 
ber of  soffites  in  the  vaults  closing  the  triangles  E  J  C. 

The  standard  divisor  X  X'  having  given  us  upon  the  extrados  of 
the  principal  transverse  arch,  projected  to  E  G,  six  rows  of  stones, 
we  mark  the  points  U,  V,  Z,  etc.,  and  working  as  before  we  obtain, 
upon  the  line  of  horizontal  projection  E  J  of  that  transverse  arch, 
the  points  U',  V,  Z'. 

Dividing  in  the  same  way  the  extrados  of  the  diagonal  arch  into 
six  parts  and  projecting  these  divisions  upon  the  line  of  the  plan 
E  C,  we  obtain  the  points  Y,  Y',  Y",  etc. 

We  then  join  the  point  U'  to  the  point  Y,  the  point  V  to  the 
point  Y',  etc.,  and  we  have  the  horizontal  projection  of  the  vertical 
planes  through  which  the  intrados  sections  of  the  soffites  must  pass. 

This  diagram  is  not  made  in  the  building-yard. 

After  having  divided  the  extrados  of  the  wall  arches  and  of  the 
principal  transverse  arches,  governing  them,  according  to  the  num- 
ber of  the  soffites  given  by  the  width  of  the  blocks,  we  divide 
into  equal  parts  the  extrados  of  the  diagonal  arches,  as  we  have  just 
shown,  and  we  proceed  at  once  to  the  building  of  the  vaults  without 
movable  centres ;  this  is  the  method  used  for  giving  in  horizontal 
projections  the  lines  N',  0',  M',  P',  L\  Q',  etc.,  and  U'  F,  V  Y,  etc., 
which  we  have  drawn  upon  our  diagram. 

Let  us  see  in  what  this  method  consists. 

The  builder  says,  for  instance  :  "  The  line  C  K,  joining  the  key  of 
the  diagonal  arches  to  the  key  of  the  wall-arches,  will  have  a  versed 
sine  of  .50  centimetres  ; "  then  the  mason,  accustomed  to  make  this 
sort  of  vault,  has  no  need  to  know  more  in  order  to  build,  without  a 
diagram,  the  entire  triangle  of  filling  A  C  D.  It  is  sufficient  for  him 
to  take  the  distance  C  K  or  C  J  and  draw  (Fig.  5G)  C  K'  upon  a 
plank  and  then  erect  in  the  middle  of  this  line  a  perpendicular  ab  of 
.50  centimetres  and  pass  an  arc  through  the  three  points  C  b  K. 
Having  the  drawing  of  this  curve  with  him,  he  builds  at  least  one 


144 


VAULTS. 


third  of  each  of  the  sides  of  his  filling,  as  a  wall.  It  suffices  him  to 
measure  with  a  string,  the  length  of  each  row  of  stones,  and  carry 
that  length  around  upon  the  arc  C  b  K'  and  then  see  what  versed 
sine  that  chord  gives  for  the  portion  of  the  arch  so  cut  off ;  that 
versed  sine  is  the  one  to  be  taken  for  the  closing  row  of  stones. 

The  first  third  of  the  filling  has  so  nearly  a  vertical  arrangement 
that  the  stones  keep  their  places  of  their  own  accord,  just  as  the 
mason  lays  them,  as  seen  in 


Figure  57.  But  above  the 
first  third,  or  thereabouts,  he 
needs  the  aid  of  a  curved 
pattern,  since  the  rows  of 
stones  grow  longer  in  pro- 
portion as  one  approaches 
the  key.  Now,  because 
these  rows  grow  longer,  it 
would  be  necessary  to  cut  a 
templet  for  each  of  them, 
which  would  be  tedious  and 
expensive.  He  must  accord- 
ingly have  two  patterns, 
arranged  as  shown  in  Figure 


58,  being  longer,   together,  Fig>  57# 

than  the  line  of  filling  at 

the  key  and  each  alone  being  no  longer  than  the  row  of  voussoirs, 
too  sloping  to  be  set  in  without  the  aid  of  a  support.  Each  of  these 
patterns,  cut  out  of  a  plank  about  .04  centimetres  thick,  has  in  the 
middle  a  slot,  hollowed  out,  concentric  to  the  curvature  of  the 
standard  arc,  of  which  we  were  just  speaking  (Fig.  56). 

With  the  aid  of  two  wedges,  C,  passing  through  these  slots,  we 
make  the  two  patterns  firm,  and  at  every  row  of  voussoirs  can  elon- 
gate them  at  will,  by  sliding  them  one  against  the  other.  The  pat- 
terns are  fixed  upon  the  extrados  of  the  arches,  by  means  of  two  iron 


CONSTRUCTION. 


145 


angles,  A  B,  nailed  at  the  extremities  of  the  curves  ;  the  mason  must 


upon  the  arches,  to  let  the  surface  of  the  pattern  hang  vertical  be- 
fore fixing  it  to  the  sides  of  the  arches,  whether  by  pins  or  by  a  hand- 
ful of  plaster. 

Thus  the  workman  closes  the  fillings  of  vaults  in  accordance  with 
the  diagram  (Fig.  55)  ;  in  other  words  while  giving  to  each  row  of 
voussoirs,  in  the  filling,  a  sufficiently  marked  curve  to  bind  them  to- 
gether and  throw  their  weight  upon  the  arches,  he  is  none  the  less 
obliged  to  keep  that  curve  vertical,  for  he  must  place  his  curved  pat- 
tern under  each  line  separating  these  rows  of  stones  as  seen  in  Figure 


59  and  not  under  the  middle  of  these  rows  themselves.  It  is  not 
without  reason  that  they  must  place  the  patterns  in  a  vertical  plane 
and,  thereby  cause  the  edge  of  the  bed  of  each  row  of  stones  to  pass 
through  this  vertical  plane. 

These  beds  (Fig.  GO)  on  the  intrados  being  curved,  it  results  that 
the  section  C  D  is  found  to  have  a  greater  development  than  the  sec- 
tion D  B  which  governs  the  number  of  rows  of  stones  and  even  then 
the  section  D  A,  although  in  horizontal  projection  the  line  D  A  is 
longer  than  the  line  D  C.  The  mason  must  take  account,  at  each  row 
of  stones,  of  this  excess  of  development  and  give  to  each  of  these 
rows  a  soffite  presenting  the  surface  drawn  in  E.  The  workman 
then,  must  be  guided  by  a  mechanical  device  :    for  the  curved 


take  care,  after  having  placed  the  tips  A  B,  upon  the  points  marked 


Fig.  58. 


146 


VAULTS. 


pattern,  always  set  vertically,  gives  necessarily  the  form  to  be  given 
to  the  soffites.  If  the  mason  closed  the  fillings  with  rows  of  vous- 
soirs  whose  soffites  were  of  equal  size  throughout  all  their  extent, 
he  would  be  obliged,  on  reaching  the  key,  to  account  for  the  surplus 
of  development  given  by  the  section  C  D  over  the  section  D  B  and 
he  would  have  two  final  rows  of  stones  presenting  on  the  intrados  a 
surface  analogous  to  that  represented  in  G,  which  would  have  an 
unpleasant  effect  and  would  oblige  him  to  employ,  at  this  point, 
stones  of  much  larger  size  than  anywhere  else.  Being  obliged, 
through  the  vertical  position  of  the  curved  pattern,  to  make  the  inner 
edge  of  the  bed  of  each  row  of  stones  keep  within  a  vertical  plane, 
the  mason  succeeds  unconsciously  in  distributing  among  all  these 
rows  the  surplus  of  development  caused  by  the  concavity  of  the  vault. 


Fig.  59.  Fig.  60. 

All  this  is  much  simpler  to  execute  than  to  explain  and  we  have 
never  found  any  difficulty  in  adopting  this  method  in  practice. 

A  skilful  mason,  aided  by  a  boy  who  brings  him  the  required 
stones  and  mortar,  can  cover  the  triangle  of  a  vault  without  the  aid 
of  any  machine,  without  centering  and  without  other  tools  than  his 
hatchet  and  templet.  When  once  the  workman  has  understood  the 
structure  of  these  vaults  (which  does  not  take  long)  he  lays  the  rows 
of  voussoirs  with  great  ease,  having  only  to  touch  them  lightly  with 
his  hatchet  in  order  to  prevent  their  parallelism.  Almost  always 
when  he  has  acquired  practice,  he  gives  up  the  slot  patterns  and 


CONSTRUCTION.  147 

contents  himself  with  two  curves  that  he  fastens  with  two  pins,  length- 
ening them  at  every  row,  for  the  beds  of  these  stones  being  very  little 
inclined,  except  near  the  key,  a  slight  support  is  enough  to  hinder 
them  from  slipping  on  the  mortar.  Each  row  when  set  forming  an 
arch,  the  pattern  is  taken  away,  without  causing  the  least  movement. 

It  must  be  said  that  these  stones  are  seldom  very  thick  and  that 
many  fillings  in  great  Gothic  vaults,  especially  at  the  end  of  the 
twelfth  century,  have  no  more  than  from  10  centimetres  to  12  centi- 
metres of  thickness.1 

This  method  of  building  the  vaults  is  not  the  only  one ;  it  belongs 
only  to  Ile-de-France,  the  district  about  the  city  of  Beauvais  and  Cham- 
pagne, during  the  second  half  of  the  twelfth  century,  while  in  other 
provinces  less  rational  means  are  adopted.    In  Burgundy,  thanks  to 

special  kinds  of  limestone, 
composed  of  thin  courses  with 
rough  surface  and  adhering 
firmly  to  mortar,  .they  for  a 
long  time  built  their  vaults  of 
plastered  masonry,  filled-in 
over  wooden  centres. 

The  chancel  vaults  of  the 
abbey  church  of  Vezelay,  built 
toward  the  end  of  the  twelfth 
century,  present  a  singular 
mixture  of  the  methods 
adopted  by  the  builders  of  lie- 
de-France  and  of  Burgundian  traditions.  One  sees  how  much  the 
Burgundian  workmen,  skilful  draughtsmen  as  they  were,  were  per- 
plexed about  giving  the  voussoirs  of  their  filling  the  proper  shapes; 
unable  to  make  the  exact  drawing,  they  experimented  wildly,  making 
the  haunches  of  the  vaults  of  materials  cut  as  best  they  could  ;  then, 

iThe  fillings  of  the  great  vaults  in  the  Cathedral  of  Paris  have  oniy  10  centi- 
metres of  thickness. 


148 


VAULTS. 


not  knowing  how  to  close  these  fillings,  they  finished  them  off  with 
rough  stones  plastered  over. 

This  was  not  a  method,  but  a  make-shift. 

In  the  midst  of  the  provinces  comprised  in  ancient  Aquitania, 
the  habit  which  the  builders  of  the  tenth  and  eleventh  centuries  had 
contracted  of  closing  their  structures  with  domes  was  so  deeply 
rooted  that  they  did  not  until  very  late  understand  the  Gothic 
groined  vault,  and  adopted  its  appearance,  but  not  its  true  structure. 

Every  one  knows  that  the  voussoirs  composing  a  dome  give,  in 
horizontal  projection,  a  series  of  concentric  circles,  as  Figure  61 
shows.  A  being  the  cross-section  and  B  a  quarter  of  the  horizontal 
projection  of  a  hemispherical  dome. 

When  the  Gothic  system  of  construction  prevailed  in  the  royal 
domain  and  when  architects  saw  the  advantage  to  be  derived  from 
it,  they  at  once  wanted  to  adopt  it  in  all  the  western  provinces  of 
the  Continent.  But  these  various  provinces,  although  attracted  by 
the  form,  t)ie  bold  procedure  and  the  facilities  offered  by  the  new 
architecture  for  overcoming  obstacles  hitherto  insurmountable,  could 
not  tear  themselves  abruptly  away  from  the  traditions  so  powerfully 
rooted  among  the  builders  and  there  resulted  a  sort  of  compromise 
between  structure  and  form.  In  the  twelfth  century  we  see  arising, 
all  along  the  line  reaching  from  Perigord  to  the  Loire,  at  Angiers 
and  beyond,  vaults  which  in  structure  are  true  domes  but  which  try 
to  simulate  the  appearance  of  groined  vaults.  These  are  domes 
under  which  two  diagonal  arches  have  been  built,  rather  as  a  con- 
cession to  the  taste  of  the  time  than  as  a  requirement  for  solidity ; 
for,  in  fact,  these  diagonal  arches,  generally  very  weak,  support 
nothing,  but  often  are  even  attached  to  the  fillings  and  maintained 
by  them.  This  fact  is  of  great  importance,  for  we  shall  soon  see 
what  were  its  consequences.  Nevertheless,  these  builders  of  domes 
soon  saw  that  the  structure  of  their  vaults  was  by  no  means  in 
harmony  with  their  apparent  form.  The  tendency  was  already 
impressed  upon  nearly  the  whole  of  present  France  by  the  end  of 


CONSTRUCTION. 


149 


the  twelfth  century ;  people  had  to  submit  to  the  mode  of  construc- 
tion invented  by  the  artists  of  the  North ;  they  must  abandon 
Romanesque  traditions,  which  were  worn  out  and  which  the  people 
rejected  as  insufficient  for  their  needs  and  as  the  living  expression 
of  that  monastic  power  against  which  the  national  spirit  was  rising. 
The  schools  that  were  submissive  to  the  dome  made  a  first  conces- 
sion to  the  new  mode  of  construction ;  they  understood  that  the 
diagonal  (ogive)  arches  were  built  in  Gothic  structures  to  carry 
the  fillings,  so  instead  of  laying  rows  of  filling-stones,  as  they  had 
done  at  first,  regardless  of  the 
diagonal  arches,  as  indicated  in 
Figure  62,  they  took  the  extrados 
of  these  diagonal  arches  as  a  base 
of  support  and  laid  the  rows  of 
stones,  not  from  the  transverse  or 
wall-arches  toward  the  diagonal 
arches,  like  the  builders  in  Ile-de- 
France,  but  from  the  diagonal 
arches  to  the  transverse  and  wall 
arches,  intercrossing  them  at  the 
key. 

Figure  63  will  explain  this  arrangement.1 

This  construction  was  less  rational  than  that  of  the  northern 
vault,  but  it  gave  the  same  section;  that  is  to  say,  from  A,  the  key  of 
the  transverse  or  wall  arches,  to  B,  the  key  of  the  diagonal  arches,  the 
triangular  fillings  A  B  C  form  a  re-entrant  angle,  a  hollow  groin. 
But  since  these  meetings  A  B  of  the  rows  of  stones,  produced  a  bad 
effect  and  offered  a  difficulty  to  the  mason,  who  needed  at  that  line 
A  B  a  wooden  curve  to  support  each  row  of  stones  while  he  laid 
them,  they  stretched  a  rib  of  stone  from  B  to  Fto  hold  the  ends  of 
the  rows  of  stones  and  to  conceal  their  seams. 

i  Vaults  of  the  cloisters  of  Frontfroide,  near  Narbonne ;  of  the  aisles  of  the 
Cathedral  of  Ely  ;  of  the  cloister  of  Westminster  (England)  :  and  of  the  aisles  of 
the  Church  of  Eu. 


150 


VAULTS. 


At  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century,  Aquitania  was  Anglo-Norman, 
as  well  as  Maine  and  Anjou.     This  system  of  vaults  not  only  pre- 
vailed in   these  countries,  but 
even  crossed  the   channel  and 
was  adopted  in  England. 

Little  by  little,  during  the  first 
years  of  the  thirteenth  century, 
A  they  abandoned  it  in  the 
provinces  on  the  Continent,  in 
order  to  adopt  finally  the  mode 
of  Ile-de-France  ;  but  in  England 
it  remained,  spread,  became  im- 
~F  proved  and  soon  led  the  builders 

Fig.  63.  ; 

into  a  system  or  vaults  opposite 
in  principle  to  the  French  system. 

The  manner  of  laying  the  rows  of  filling-stones  of  vaults  upon  the 
arches,  borrowed  in  Ile-de-France  from  the  Roman  groined  vaults, 
and  in  England  from  the  dome,  had  singular  results. 

In  France,  the  surfaces  of  the  fillings  always  remained  concave, 
while  in  England  they  ended  by  being  convex  on  the  intrados,  or 
rather  by  forming  series  of  reversed  curvilinear  cones  intersecting 
and  by  generating  forms  quite  opposed,  therefore,  to  their  origin. 

But  when  one  studies  Gothic  architecture,  he  soon  recognizes 
that  the  reasoning,  the  logical  consequences  of  a  principle  once 
admitted  proceed  with  inflexible  rigor,  even  to  the  production  of 
results  apparently  very  strange,  extravagant  and  far  removed  from 
the  point  of  departure.  To  him  who  does  not  lose  the  traces  of  the 
incessant  attempts  of  the  builders,  the  transitions  are  not  only  per- 
ceptible, but  logically  deduced ;  their  onward  movement  is  irresisti- 
ble :  but  they  appear  to  be  the  result  of  caprice,  if  for  an  instant 
one  drops  the  clue.  Moreover,  no  one  should  accuse  those  of  dis- 
loyalty who,  not  being  builders,  judge  what  they  see  without  under- 
standing the  origin  and  the  meaning;  what  we  can  reproach  them 


CONSTRUCTION. 


151 


for,  is  the  wish  to  impose  their  judgment  upon  others  and  to  blame 

the  artists  of  our  time  who  think  that  they  find,  in  this  long  labor 

of  the  human  mind,  resources  and  useful  teaching.    Every  man  can 

express  his  opinion  upon  a  work  of  art,  by  saying:  "This  pleases 

me,"  or  "  This  does  not  please  me  " ;  but  no  one  is  permitted  to 

judge  a  product  of  the  reason  otherwise  than  by  reasoning.    It  is 

free  to  every  one  to  deny  that  a  perpendicular  let  fall  upon  a 

straight  line  forms  two  right  angles ;  but  to  wish  to  hinder  us  from 

proving  it  and,  above  all,  from  recognizing  it,  is  to  carry  the  love 

of  ignorance  too  far. 

The  Gothic  architecture  may  fail  to  please  by  its  form,  but 

E  if   any   one  claims   it   is  only 

the   product   of    ignorance  and 

chance,   we   shall   ask  leave  to 

prove  the  contrary  and  having 

proved  it,  to  study  and  make  such 

c  use  of  it  as  may  seem  best  to  us. 

Accordingly,  before  closing  this 

chapter  on  vaults,  let  us  see  how 

the   Anglo-Normans  transformed 

K  the  dome  of  the  West  into  a  vault 
A.         J  Jts 

Fjg  64  very  far*  removed  in  appearance 

from  the  hemispherical  vault.  AVe 
have  just  told  how  the  builders  of  Aquitania,  Anjou,  Maine  and 
England  had  been  induced  to  add  a  rib  to  the  diagonal-arch  vault, 
to  hide  the  crossing  of  the  filling-stones  under  the  line  of  the  keys; 
or,  in  other  words,  how  they  divided  a  square  or  oblong  vault  into 
eight  triangles,  instead  of  four.  This  point  of  departure  has  so 
great  an  importance  that  we  ask  leave  of  our  readers  to  insist  upon  it. 

Let  us  suppose  a  diagonal-arch  vault  made  half  by  Frenchmen  at 
the  beginning  of  the  thirteenth  century  and  half  by  Anglo-Normans. 

The  French  vault  will  give  (Fig.  64)  in  horizontal  projection,  the 
drawing  A  ;  the  Anglo-Norman  vault,  the  drawing  B. 


152 


VAULTS. 


Hence  nothing  was  more  natural,  than  to  connect  C,  the  key  of 

the  wall-arch,  to  D, 


the  key  of  the  diagonal 
arches,  by  a  project- 
ing rib,  hiding  the 
seam  formed  by  t  h  e 
meeting  of  the  tri- 
angles of  filling-stones 

E  C  D,  and  F  C  D. 

These  triangles  of 
filling  are  evidently 
derived  from  the 
dome,  or,  rather,  they 
are  four  pendentives 
which  meet  in  C  D. 

The  vaults  cf  Aqui- 
tania,  or  the  early  An- 
glo-Norman Gothic, 
have  also  the  keys  of 
their  wall-arches  on  a 
lower  level  than  those 
of  the  diagonal  arches 
and  their  framework  is 
presented  in  Fig.  65. 

This  figure  clearly 
shows  that  the  Anglo- 
Norman  vault  is  only 
a  hemispherical  dome, 
intersected  by  four 
pointed  arches,  for  the 
diagonal  arches  are 
semicircular. 
Fig,  65.  Upon   this  frame- 

work the  rows  of  filling-stones  are  laid,  as  represented  in  G,  while 


CONSTRUCTION. 


153 


in  France  upon  two  diagonal  and  four  wall-arches  of  the  same  dimen- 
sions and  shape,  the  rows  of  filling-stones  are  arranged  according  to 
the  drawing  H. 

Then,  although  the  principal  ribs  of  vaults  in  France  and  in  Eng- 
land may  be  identical  in  outline,  in  France  the  filling  is  evidently 
derived  from  the  Roman  groined  vault,  while  in  England  it  is  taken 
from  the  dome. 

Up  to  this  point, 
though  the  princi- 
ples of  the  con- 
struction of  these 
two  vaults  are  very 
different,  their  ap- 
pearance is  the 
same,  save  for  the 
addition  of  the  rib 
joining  the  keys  of 
the  transverse  or 
wall  arches  to  the 
key  of  the  diagonal 
arches,  an  addition 
not  absolutely  the 
rule. 

While  in  Ile-de- 
France  and  the  ad- 
joining provinces, 
at  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century,  they  were  making  only  vaults  with 
diagonal  arches,  crossed  by  transverse  arches,  or,  in  other  words,  al way  s 
engendered  by  a  square  plan  and  closed  by  sloping  spandrel  filling,  as 
seen  in  Figure  55,  they  were  seeking  in  the  West  to  obtain  the  same 
real  and  apparent  lightness,  but  always  while  keeping  something  of 
the  dome. 

There  exists  near  Saumur,  a  little  church,  which  indicates  in  the 


154 


VAULTS. 


plainest  way,  the  wavering  of  the  Western  builders,  between  the  in- 
novations of  architects  in  the  royal  domain  and  the  traditions  of 
Aquitania:  —  it  is  the  Church  of  Mouliherne;  there  the  two  systems 
confront  each  other. 

The  first  bay  of  this  church  with  a  single  nave  reaching  to  the 
facade,  is  vaulted  according  to  the  plan  Figure  6G. 

From  A  to  B  is  a  large 
transverse  pointed  arch. 

From  A  to  C  and  from 
B  to  D  are  two  broken 
pointtd  arches,  which  are 
only  mouldings  with  semi- 
circular section. 

A  second  transverse  arch 
E  F,  of  similar  section, 
crosses  the  two  diagonals. 

From  E  to  G  and  from  F 
to  G  are  stretched  two  other 
secondary  diagonal  arches, 


Fig.  67. 


meeting  the  principal  diagonal  arches  in  K  and  1. 

The  four  triangles  included  between  the  points  E,  F  and  G,  are 
closed,  according  to  the  Aquitanian  or  Anglo-Norman  method,  that 
is  to  say,  according  to  the  principle  of  the  dome;  the  four  other 
triangles,  E  D  I,  D  G  I,  G  C  K  and  C  F  K,  are  closed  according  to 
the  French  method  and  yet  the  ribs  L  7,  M  I,  N  K  and  0  K,  join- 
ing the  keys  of  the  wall-arches  to  the  meeting-points  I  and  K,  project 
below  the  rows  of  the  keys  of  the  fillings.  These  ribs  are  even 
adorned  with  figures  carved  in  relief. 

As  to  the  triangles  A  E  R  and  B  F  R,  they  are  closed  in  the 
French  way  by  slanting  fillings.  But  as  half  of  a  transverse  arch 
exists  from  G  to  R,  the  builder  has  felt  it  his  duty  to  continue  it  as 
a  projecting  key  rib,  up  to  the  summit  of  the  great  transverse  arch 
A  B. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


155 


Thus  the  section  taken  through  G  S  gives  the  drawing  (Fig.  67). 
If  one  wishes  to  get  an  exact  idea  of  the  appearance  of  this  vault, 
he  must  refer  to  the  perspective  view  which  we  give  in  Figure  68. 

In  the  royal  domain  they  would  have  been  content  to  close  the 


Fig.  68. 

triangles  of  filling  (Fig.  66),  E  D  R,  D  G  R.  G  C  R,  C  F  72,  by 
rows  of  stones  laid  from  the  wall-arches  E  D,  D  G,  etc.,  to  the  trans- 
verse and  diagonal  arches  E  R,  G  R,  D Ry  just  as  they  have  done 
with  the  triangle  A  E  R. 


156 


VAULTS. 


So  long  as  the  Aquitanian  and  Anglo-Norman  vault  kept  its 
diagonal  arches  very  high,  like  those  of  the  early  French  Gothic 
vault,  the  appearance  of  these  vaults  was  almost  the  same  ;  but  in 


L  o  K. 

i 


o 

Fig.  69. 


France  they  saw,  from  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century,  the  advantage 
that  there  would  be  in  raising  the  keys  of  the  transverse  and  wall- 
arches  to  the  level  of  the  keys  of  the  diagonal  arches ;  first,  in  order 


CONSTRUCTION. 


157 


to  be  able  to  make  the  windows  higher  ;  second,  to  let  the  tie-beams 
of  the  trusses  pass  above  the  vaults  without  immoderately  raising 
the  lateral  walls. 

They  wished  to  copy  this  improvement  in  the  Anglo-Norman 
provinces.  There  a  difficulty  was  presented :  the  principle  of  con- 
struction of  the  rows  of  filling-stones  derived  from  the  dome  was  ill- 
adapted  to  this 
innovation.  We 
have  just  said 
that  a  rib  had  to 
be  placed  under 
the  meeting  of 
the  ends  of  these 
rows  of  stones. 

Now,  let  Fig- 
ure 69  be  the 
section  of  an 
A  n  g  1  o-Norman 
vault. 

When  con- 
structed accord- 
ing to  the  draw- 
ing^, the  rib  con- 
necting the  keys 
B  and  C  could 
offer,  by  its 
curvature  a  per- 
fect resistance; 
F'g-70-  but   if  built 

according  to  the  design  D,  after  the  new  French  method,  the  project- 
ing rib  C  E  had  not  enough  rise  to  present  a  sufficient  resistance; 
if  the  vault  was  large,  there  was  reason  to  fear  that  this  rib  would 
give  way  at  G,  about  the  middle  of  its  length.     To  ward  off  this 


158 


VAULTS. 


danger,  the  Anglo-Norman  builders  did  not  abandon  their  method  of 
filling  ;  they  preferred  to  support  this  weak  point  G  by  new  project- 
ing rib,  traced  on  H  /,  upon  the  horizontal  plan  K  and  then  instead 
of  setting  the  arches  of  filling-stones  as  drawn  in  L,  they  placed 
them  as  represented  in  K. 

In  examining  the  quarter  of  a  vault,  0  M  P  I,  one  sees  that  its 
inner  surface,  through  the  arrangement  of  the  rows  of  filling-stones, 
came  very  near  giving  a  portion  of  a  curvilinear  concave  cone. 

Once  upon  this  path,  the  Anglo-Norman  builders  thought  no  more 
about  the  French  vault ;  they  developed  freely  the  principle  that 
they  had  not  originally  admitted,  except  unconsciously ;  they  saw  in 
the  Gothic  vault  only  a  network  of  arches,  interlacing  and  support- 
ing one  another  reciprocally  and  supporting  fillings  all  of  which 
showed  surfaces  scarcely  concave. 

Already,  in  the  middle  of  the  thirteenth  century,  they  were  build- 
ing the  choir  of  the  Cathedral  of  Ely,  whose  high  vaults  give  the 
horizontal  projection  (Fig.  70),  and  the  section  C  D  made  through 
C  D'.  Relying  on  these  crossed  and  counter-balanced  arches  they 
did  not  hesitate  to  raise  the  keys  C  D'  of  the  wall-arches  E  F above 
the  keys  G,  in  order  to  make  their  windows  very  high,  as  seen  in 
the  section  C  D. 

But  the  appearance  of  these  vaults  in  the  interior  is  very  different 
from  that  of  the  French  vaults. 

We  give  (Fig.  71)  the  perspective  view  of  one  starting-point  of 
the  vaults  in  the  choir  of  the  Cathedral  of  Ely.  It  is  seen  that  these 
arches  or  projecting  groins  give  a  sheaf  of  curves,  a  considerable 
portion  of  which  present  a  concave  and  curved  conical  surface,  and 
to  render  that  effect  more  striking,  the  builder  has  taken  pains  to 
unite  all  these  arches  upon  the  abacus  of  the  capitals,  in  a  compact 
group,  whose  lower  bed  we  indicate  in  A  (Fig.  71,  second),  and  in 
Cj  its  horizontal  section  at  the  level  B.  But  if  that  horizontal  sec- 
tion forms  a  portion  of  a  polygon  inclining  towards  the  branches 
from   D  to  E,  from  D  to  F,  which  is  the  wall-arch,  it  rises 


CONSTRUCTION. 


159 


Fig.  7  I .    From  the  Choir  of  Ely  Cathedral. 


160  ,  VAULTS. 

(retreats)  abruptly,  for  since  the  starting-point  of  this  arch  is  much 
more  elevated  than  that  of  the  diagonal  and  transverse  arches  and 
ribs,  the  filling-stones  G  F  must  rise  vertically  in  a  plane  passing 
through  G  F,  These  vaults  then  present,  up  to  the  starting-point  of 
the  wallarches,  a  group  of  ribs  detaching  themselves  from  the  con- 


Fig.  7  I  b. 

struction,  a  compact  mass,  heavy  in  reality,  but  with  a  certain  pre- 
tension to  lightness. 

Wishing  to  keep  the  keys  of  the  wall-arches  on  a  level  with  the 
keys  of  the  diagonal  arches,  as  we  have  before  remarked,  and  being 
perplexed,  evidently,  in  their  combinations,  by  these  retreating  and 
vertical  surfaces,  G  F,  the  Anglo-Norman  builders  chose  to  raise 
the  starting-points  of  the  transverse  and  diagonal  arches  and  ribs 
to  the  level  of  those  of  the  wall-arches. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


161 


The  presence  of  the  vertical  surfaces  F  G  beside  the  curved 
surfaces  D  E  was  not  logical  enough  for  these  rationalists.  But 
while  placing  the  starting-points  of  all  the  arches  of  the  vault  upon 
the  same  level,  in  order  to  avoid  these  vertical  surfaces,  the  English 
architects  still  tried  to  have  the  keys  of  the  diagonal  and  transverse 
arches  upon  the  same  horizontal  line  ;  so  it  was  necessary  that  these 
transverse  and  diagonal  arches  should  be  very  depressed.  Accord- 
ingly, they  came,  in  England,  to  abandon  in  the  transverse  arches 
the  acute  arch  and  in  the  diagonal  arches  the  semicircle  and  to 


Fig.  72. 

adopt  curves  composed  of  portions  of  ellipses,  keeping  the  true 
pointed  curves  only  for  wall-arches,  as  indicated  in  Figure  72,  while 
the  keys  A,  B,  C,  were  all  in  the  same  horizontal  plane. 

From  these  sheaves  of  ribs  forming,  as  it  were,  pyramids,  or 
inverted  curvilinear  cones  to  vaults  composed  of  intersecting  curvi- 
linear cones  is  no  great  distance ;  and  the  builders  at  the  end  of  the 
fourteenth  century,  in  England,  soon  arrived  at  that  last  result 
(Fig.  72b).  But  these  vaults  are  not  closed  by  fillings  of  masonry 
upon  arches  faced  in  stone  ;  they  are  vaults  composed  entirely  of 
large  facing-stones,  very  shallow,  needing  diagrams,  a  complicated 


162 


VAULTS. 


design  and  certain  artifices  such  as,  for  example,  transverse  arches 
buried  in  the  reversed  concavities  of  the  roof,  as  we  have  repre- 
sented in  A  B  C,  upon  the  design  illustrating  the  extrados  of  the 
vault.1 

Thus,  by  a  series  of  deductions  indeed  very  logical,  the  Anglo- 


A 


Fig.  726. 

Norman  builders  passed  from  the  dome  to  the  strange  vaults  com- 
posed of  the  intersections  of  curvilinear  cones,  and  separated 
entirely  from  the  French  system. 

In  Normandy  these  vaults  were  never  adopted,  but  of  the  Eng- 
lish influence  something  remained.  In  that  province  they  often 
abandoned,  towards  the  end  of  the  fifteenth  century,  the  vaults 

1See  Dr.  Willis's  "  Memoirs  on  the  Construction  of  Vaults  in  the  Middle  Ages" 
and  the  translation  by  M.  Cesar  Daly,  Vol.  IV  of  Revue  d' Architecture. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


163 


composed  of  rows  of  filling-stones  fixed  upon  arches.  They  wished 
also  to  use  dressed  stones. 

The  Normans,  the  Maneeaux,  the  Bretons  willingly  made  vaults 
composed :  either  of  large  slabs  of  hewn  stone,  decorated  with 
mouldings  on  the  interior  and  mutually  supported,  without  recourse 
to  arches,  or  else  of  stone  ceilings  set  upon  arches.  In  the  church 
of  Ferte-Bernard,  near  Mans,  there  are  seen  pretty  chapels  of  the 
sixteenth  century,  thus  vaulted  (Fig.  73). 1 

These  have  slabs  cut  in  panels,  on  the  inside,  and  set  over  pierced 
stonework  supported  by  diagonal  arches. 

This  system  of  construction  is  elegant  and  ingenious  but  one 
could  wish  here  to  see  the  windows  square,  for  the  pointed  wall- 
arches  have  no  longer  any  reason  for  existing. 

The  system  of  Gothic  vaults  had  to  come  to  this  ;  which  was  nec- 
essarily its  last  mode  of  expression.  To  close  the  intervals  left  be- 
tween the  arches  by  ceilings,  and,  when  necessary,  multiply  the 
arches  until  there  were  no  spaces  left  among  them  which  could  not 
be  filled  by  one  or  two  slabs,  this  was  to  arrive  at  the  limit  of  the 
system,  and  this  was  what  they  tried,  often  with  success,  at  the  be- 
ginning of  the  Renaissance,  whether  in  religious  monuments,  or  in 
civil  architecture. 

It  is  quite  right  to  do  this  justice  to  the  architects  of  the  French 
Renaissance,  that  they  knew  how  to  employ  with  great  freedom  the 
Gothic  methods  concerning  the  building  of  vaults,  and  that,  in  break- 
ing away  from  the  routine  by  which  the  masters  of  the  fifteenth  cen- 
tury were  enslaved,  they  applied  to  new  forms  the  resources  of  the 
art  of  building  of  the  Middle  Ages. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  sixteenth  century,  architects  very  frequently 
employed  the  system  of  vaults  composed  of  slabs  resting  on  ribs, 
which  allowed  them  to  decorate  these  vaults  with  rich  sculptures 
and  to  obtain  effects  until  then  unknown.  Arranging  a  sort  of  net- 
work of  stone,  with  key  pendants  or  floral  ornaments  at  the  points 


1  The  construction  of  these  chapels  dates  back  to  1513  or  1544. 


164 


VAULTS. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


165 


Every  arch-stone  of  the  transverse  ribs  A  has  on  each  side  of  the 
little  key  pendant  a  cavity  B  to  hold  the  longitudinal  arch-stones  C ; 
the  slabs  D  simply  rest  in  grooves  upon  these  arch-stones  as  the  de- 
tail X  shows ;  A'  is  the  cross-section  of  one  of  the  transverse  arches, 
B'  one  of  the  voussoirs  of  the  longitudinal  bands  and  D'  the  section 
of  the  slab.    This  method  is  simple  and  such  a  construction  is  good 


Fig.  74. 

and  easy  to  execute,  as  the  slabs  can  be  sculptured  before  being  put 
in  place ;  it  presents  all  the  elasticity  that  the  Gothic  builders  had 
obtained  in  the  composition  of  their  vaults. 

But  the  artists  of  the  Renaissance  forgot  too  promptly  these  excel- 
lent traditions,  and  if  for  a  long  time  they  still  kept  these  forms,  de- 
rived from  a  logical  principle  of  construction,  they  treated  these 


166 


VAULTS. 


kinds  of  vaults  as  ordinary  cradle-vaults,  no  longer  considering  the 
cross  ribs  as  independent  ribs. 

During  the  fifteenth  and  sixteenth  centuries,  the  English  and  the 
Normans  had  succeeded,  in  the  construction  of  vaults,  in  producing 
effects  that  were  surprising  for  their  ingenuity  and  their  richness. 
The  architects  of  Ile-de-France,  Champagne,  Burgundy  and  the 
Loire  preserved,  even  in  those  latter  days  of  the  Gothic  period, 
more  moderation  ;  and  during  the  sixteenth  century  they  tried  to  re- 
produce the  forms,  if  not  the  structure  of  the  Roman  vault. 

When  the  individuality  of  a  people  is  left  to  its  own  inspiration 
and  is  not  falsified  by  a  narrow  spirit  of  system,  it  exhibits  itself 
with  entire  freedom  in  their  works  of  art,  particularly  in  those 
which  are  to  a  great  extent  the  result  of  reasoning. 

The  Normans  have  always  been  daring  workers  rather  than  in- 
ventors ;  they  have  been  able  at  all  times  to  appropriate  the  discov- 
eries of  their  neighbors,  and  therefore  to  derive  profit  to  themselves. 
One  should  not  require  of  them  those  efforts  of  the  imagination,  those 
conceptions  which  belong  rather  to  the  southern  mind,  but  rather 
ingenious  and  profound  applications,  logical  and  scientific  execution, 
persistence  and  care  in  the  carrying  out  of  details. 

These  qualities  are  found  in  Anglo-Norman  edifices  built  during 
the  twelfth  and  thirteenth  centuries.  One  should  not  require  of  the 
Anglo-Normans  that  freedom  of  procedure,  that  variety,  that  in- 
dividuality which  is  found  in  French  constructions. 

Among  them  if  a  method  passes  for  a  good  and  practical  one,  they 
perfect  it,  extend  its  consequences,  follow  its  progress  and  cling  to 
it.  We,  French,  on  the  contrary,  are  always  seeking,  but  we  perfect 
nothing.  The  Anglo-Norman  constructions  are  usually  executed 
with  more  care  than  ours,  but  to  know  one  is  to  know  them  all; 
one  never  sees  shining  out  among  them  those  original  and  bold 
inspirations  which  have  haunted  our  architects  from  the  earliest 
days  of  Gothic  art ;  the  true  era  of  intellectual  emancipation  for  the 
laboring  classes  of  the  North  of  France. 


CHAPTER  VII. 


Materials. 

HERE  is  one  interesting  observation  to  be  made  which  may  have 
a  certain  bearing.  The  younger  nations  are,  the  more  do  the 
monuments  that  they  erect  take  the  character  of  durability  ;  in 
growing  old,  on  the  contrary,  they  are  content  with  transitory 
constructions,  as  if  they  were  conscious  of  their  approaching  end. 
It  is  with  nations  as  with  single  individuals ;  a  young  man  will  build 
more  solidly  than  a  septuagenarian,  for  the  former  has  no  presenti- 
ment of  his  end  and  he  seems  to  believe  that  all  about  him  can  last 
only  as  long  as  himself. 

Now,  the  Middle  Ages  are  a  singular  compound  of  youth  and  de- 
crepitude. 

The  old  society  still  keeps  a  breath  of  life  while  the  new  is  in  its 
infancy.  The  edifices  built  in  the  Middle  Ages  experience  these 
two  contrary  situations.  In  the  midst  of  nations  permeated  by  a 
youthful  and  strong  vitality  like  the  Normans  and  the  Burgundians, 
for  instance,  the  constructions  are  built  much  more  solidly,  and 
assume  a  stronger  individuality  than  among  the  dwellers  on  the  banks 
of  the  Seine,  the  Marne  and  the  Loire,  whose  customs  during  the 
twelfth  century  still  bear  the  trace  of  Roman  traditions. 

The  Burgundian  even  has  a  considerable  advantage  over  the 
Norman  in  that  he  is  endowed  with  an  active  imagination  and  that 
his  temperament  is  to  a  degree  southern. 


168 


MATERIALS. 


During  the  Romanesque  period  his  monuments  have  a  character 
of  strength  that  cannot  be  found  in  the  other  French  provinces  and 
when  the  Gothic  system  begins  to  be  developed,  he  takes  it  up 
and  applies  it  with  singular  energy. 

Perhaps  he  has  a  less  sure  taste  than  his  neighbor,  the  dweller  on 
the  banks  of  the  Seine  or  the  Marne  ;  but  he  has  certainly,  more 
than  the  other,  the  feeling  of  his  own  strength,  the  consciousness  of 
his  own  vitality  and  the  means  of  displaying  these  youthful  qualities. 
It  seems  as  if  the  territory  which  he  occupies  had  come  to  his  aid, 
for  it  supplies  him  with  excellent  materials,  of  great  resistance,  of 
large  dimensions  and  lending  themselves  to  all  the  bold  ideas  that 
his  ardent  imagination  suggests  to  him.  On  the  contrary,  in  the 
basins  of  the  Seine,  the  Marne,  the  Oise  and  the  middle  Loire,  in 
old  France,  the  materials  furnished  by  the  soil  are  soft,  light  and 
of  little  resistance  ;  they  ought,  by  their  very  nature,  to  banish 
the  idea  of  temerity  and  oblige  the  builder  to  supply  by  ingenious 
combinations  what  the  soil  refuses  to  him. 

We  must  take  account  of  the  properties  of  these  different 
materials  and  of  the  influence  exerted  by  their  qualities  over  the 
methods  employed  by  builders ;  but,  independently  of  these  particu- 
lar qualities  of  the  materials  suitable  for  building,  we  repeat,  the 
character  of  the  people  of  these  provinces  presents  great  differences 
which  influence  the  means  adopted. 

The  transition  is  complete:  of  the  Romanesque  structure  nothing 
remains ;  the  principle  of  the  equilibrium  of  forces  has  displaced 
the  system  of  inert  stability. 

Every  edifice  at  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century  is  composed  of  a 
framework  rendered  solid  by  the  combination  of  oblique  resistances, 
or  of  vertical  weights  opposed  to  thrusts  and  of  an  envelope,  a 
garment  which  clothes  that  framework. 

Every  edifice  has  its  skeleton  and  its  membranes ;  it  is  only  a 
structure  of  stone,  independent  of  the  garment  that  covers  it.  This 
skeleton  is  rigid  or  flexible,  according  to  the  need  and  location ;  it 


CONSTRUCTION. 


169 


yields  or  resists ;  it  seems  to  possess  life  for  it  obeys  contrary  forces, 
and  its  immovability  is  obtained  only  by  means  of  the  equilibrium  of 
these  forces,  not  passive  but  acting. 

Already  we  have  been  able  to  appreciate  the  properties  of  this 
system  in  the  description  that  we  have  given  of  the  construction  of 
the  choir  in  the  church  of  Notre  Dame  at  Chalons-sur-Marne  (Figs. 
41,  42,  43)  ;  but  how  clumsy  and,  at  the  same  time,  labored,  mean  and 
complicated  that  structure  appears,  if  we  contrast  it  with  the  beautiful 
Burgundian  constructions  of  the  first  half  of  the  thirteenth  century. 

There  all  is  clear,  frank,  easy  to  understand ;  and  what  wise 
hardihood !  the  hardihood  of  people,  who  are  sure  of  not  failing,  be- 
cause they  have  prepared  for  everything,  have  left  nothing  to 
chance  and  know  the  limits  which  good  sense  forbids  them  to  pass. 

We  have  reached  that  period  of  construction  in  the  Middle  Ages 
during  which  the  nature  of  the  materials  used  is  to  play  an  impor- 
tant part. 

We  cannot  pass  over  in  silence  the  remarks  that  ought  to  serve  as 
an  introduction  to  the  methods  of  building  used  by  the  Gothic  archi- 
tects. They  had  built  so  great  a  number  of  public  and  private 
edifices  during  the  twelfth  century  that  we  are  not  surprised  to  find 
among  these  builders  a  profound  knowledge  of  the  materials  suit- 
able for  building,  and  of  the  resources  furnished  by  their  use. 

The  men  who  cannot  acquire  a  very  broad  education,  for  want  of 
instruction  completed  by  the  successive  observations  of  several  cen- 
turies, are  obliged  to  make  up  for  that  elementary  poverty  by  the 
keenness  of  their  intelligence  ;  and  being  unable  to  rely  upon  docu- 
ments which  do  not  exist,  they  must  make  these  observations  for  them- 
selves, collect  them,  classify  them  and  form  a  theory  from  them. 
Experience  alone  guides  them  ;  it  is  not  until  later  that  rules  are  estab- 
lished and  it  must  certainly  be  confessed  that,  however  complete  may 
be  the  theory,  however  numerous  and  good  the  rules,  they  never  suc- 
ceed in  taking  the  place  of  the  observation  based  on  the  experience 
of  every  day. 


170 


MATERIALS. 


At  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century,  the  builders  had  quarried  and 
cut  so  great  a  quantity  of  stone  that  they  had  attained  to  an  exact 
knowledge  of  their  properties  and  to  the  use  of  these  materials,  by 
reason  of  these  properties,  with  a  very  rare  intelligence.  It  was  not 
then,  as  to-day,  an  easy  matter  to  procure  hewn  stone  ;  the  means 
of  preparing  and  transporting  it  were  insufficient  and  it  was  necessary 
to  obtain  it  on  the  spot ;  it  was  impossible  to  procure  stones  from  dis- 
tant regions:  therefore  it  was  by  means  of  local  resources  that  the 
architects  had  to  raise  their  edifices  and  often  these  resources  were 
feeble.  People  do  not  take  sufficient  account  of  these  difficulties 
when  they  estimate  the  architecture  of  those  times  and  they  often 
blame  the  architects  and  consider  as  a  puerile  desire  to  raise  con- 
structions surprising  for  their  lightness  what  was  in  reality  only  an 
extreme  poverty  of  means.  Building-stone  was,  in  the  twelfth  and 
thirteenth  centuries,  comparatively  what  it  is  in  our  time,  a  mate- 
rial rare,  and  consequently  dear  ;  it  was,  therefore,  necessary  to  man- 
age and  use  it  so  as  to  make  only  the  smallest  amount  possible  enter 
into  the  construction.  There  is  no  need  to  refer  to  written  docu- 
ments to  find  out  this  truth  ;  it  is  enough  to  examine  public  and  pri- 
vate edifices  with  some  attention,  and  it  is  soon  recognized  that  the 
builders  not  only  never  used  one  stone  more  than  was  needed  but 
that  also  they  never  put  into  the  work  other  kinds  than  those 
suitable  to  each  place,  scrupulously  economizing  on  the  most  expen- 
sive stone,  that  is  to  say,  upon  those  of  very  great  hardness  or  of 
large  size.  Hand-work,  on  the  contrary,  being  then  rather  inex- 
pensive, the  architects  did  not  fail  to  make  a  lavish  use  of  it. 
Moreover,  it  is  quite  in  the  order  of  things  that  when  a  material 
is  costly  in  itself,  one  should  seek  to  bring  out  its  value  by 
some  extraordinary  treatment.  We  recommend  these  observations 
to  those  persons  who,  not  unreasonably,  condemn  the  servile 
imitation  of  Gothic  architecture.  This  is  what  one  might  say,  but 
no  one  has  yet  thought  of  it:  "If  in  the  twelfth  century,  a 
cubic  metre  of  stone  was  worth  on  an  average  two  hundred  francs, 


CONSTRUCTION. 


171 


and  the  day's  work  of  a  stone-cutter  one  franc,  it  was  reasonable  to 
use  as  little  stone  as  possible  in  an  edifice,  and  it  was  natural  to 
bring  out  the  value  of  that  precious  material  by  workmanship  cost- 
ing so  little.  But  to-day  when  stone  averages  in  value  one  hundred 
francs  per  cubic  metre,  while  the  daily  wages  of  a  stone-cutter  repre- 
sents six  or  seven  francs,  there  is  no  longer  the  same  reasons  for  so 
far  sparing  the  stone  at  the  expense  of  the  solidity  and  for  giving  that 
substance,  which  costs  so  little,  a  workmanship  which  costs  so  dear."1 

This  argument  would  be  more  conclusive  against  the  imitators  of 
Gothic  architecture  than  is,  for  example,  the  comparison  of  the  nave 
of  a  Gothic  church  with  the  inverted  hull  of  a  ship  ;  for  this  com- 
parison is  a  eulogy  rather  than  a  criticism,  as  would  be  the  compari- 
son of  the  dome  of  the  Pantheon  with  a  bee-hive. 

But  let  us  leave  these  comparisons,  which,  as  the  proverb  says, 
are  not  reasons  and  let  us  go  on. 

The  builders  in  the  Middle  Ages  were  not  acquainted  with  the 

sandstone  saw,  that  long  blade  of  wrought-iron,  with  the  aid  of 

which,  by  a  horizontal  movement  back  and  forth,  a  workman  can 

cut  enormous  blocks  into  slices  as  thin  as  occasion  requires. 

1Some  one  will  perhaps  ask  how  it  can  he  that  stone  is  so  dear  when  hand- 
work is  so  cheap,  since  stone  acquires  value  only  by  the  quarrying.  To  this  we 
reply,  in  the  first  place,  that  the  quarrying  may  be  done  with  more  or  less  skill 
and  by  means  of  more  or  less  powerful  machines ;  and  that  a  very  advanced 
state  of  industry  always  brings  a  diminution  of  price  upon  the  raw  material,  be- 
cause of  the  facility  of  preparation,  of  transportation  and  the  use  of  improved 
machines. 

A  cubic  metre  of  stone  which  will  cost  for  transportation  on  a  canal  only  five 
francs  per  forty  kilometres,  for  example,  will  cost  twenty  or  more  francs  if 
brought  on  wagons,  supposing  the  distance  traversed  to  be  the  same  ;  while 
if  the  roads  are  bad,  the  difference  will  be  very  considerable.  Now  this  is  just 
what  took  place  in  the  Middle  Ages,  without  counting  the  tolls  and  the  duties 
on  quarrying,  which  were  often  enormous.  Centralization  is  one  of  the  surest 
means  of  obtaining  raw  materials  at  a  low  price.  Formerly  there  was  not  an 
abbot  or  a  noble  in  the  land  who  did  not  exact  the  payment  of  duties  of  passage, 
and,  these  duties  being  arbitrary,  there  resulted  a  considerable  increase  upon 
the  cost  of  quarrying.  In  proof  of  this,  we  see,  for  instance,  monastic  institu- 
tions going  great  distances  to  obtain  stone  because  it  comes  from  quarries 
belonging  to  them,  and  because  they  have  only  to  follow  the  roads  free  of 
duties,  while  they  do  not  take  the  materials  which  are  nearer  to  them,  but 
which  must  cross  lauds  belonging  to  proprietors  not  vassals  of  the  abbey. 


172 


MATERIALS. 


There  are  still  seventy  departments  in  France  where  that  very 
simple  machine  is  not  used  and  these  are  generally  the  places  where 
they  build  the  best,  for  the  advantages  of  the  sandstone  saw  may  be 
disputed. 

France  abounds  in  ledges  of  limestone  of  great  variety  and  excel- 
lence and  easy  to  quarry.  These  ledges,  as  every  one  knows,  are 
hard  or  soft,  thin  or  thick,  usually  thin  when  they  are  hard  and 
thick  when  they  are  soft.  Now,  there  is  always  an  advantage  to  be 
gained,  in  building,  from  respecting  the  order  of  nature;  this  has 
often  been  observed  by  the  ancients  and  with  still  more  scrupulous 
care  by  the  Gothic  builders.  They  have  extracted  and  used  the 
materials  such  as  were  furnished  by  the  ledges  of  stone,  even  govern- 
ing the  members  of  the  building  by  the  height  of  these  ledges. 
Never  dividing  a  stone,  as  we  do  to-day  in  our  work-yards,  they  set 
them  up  whole  in  their  structures,  that  is  to  say,  with  the  heart  kept 
in  the  middle,  their  beds  below  and  above,  contenting  themselves 
with  chiseling1  them  off. 

This  method  is  excellent,  for  it  preserves  in  the  stone  all  its 
natural  force,  all  its  means  of  resistance. 

If  the  early  Gothic  builders  used  soft  stones  for  their  points  of 
supports  (as  they  were  often  forced  to  do,  in  default  of  finding 
others),  they  took  care  to  leave  them  a  great  height  of  course ;  for 
in  this  case  soft  stone  is  less  liable  to  be  crushed.  As  to  hard  stones 
and  among  others  the  thinnest,  which  are  generally  the  strongest, 
they  used  these  as  ties,  as  lintels  prolonged  to  connect  distant  piers 
with  one  another;  and  they  composed  the  supports  which  were  to 
carry  a  very  heavy  burden,  either  by  piling  the  stones  one  upon 
another,  if  these  supports  were  very  thick,  or  by  setting  them  up- 
right, against  their  stratum,  if  the  supports  were  very  slender. 
With  regard  to  these  stones  set  against  the  stratum,  we  recognize  all 

JTo  chisel  a  stone  is  to  take  away  from  both  of  its  beds  the  portions  of  lime 
which  have  preceded  or  followed  the  complete  geological  formation  ;  in  one 
word,  to  remove  the  parts  liable  to  be  decomposed  by  the  action  of  the  air  or  of 
dampness. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


173 


the  delicacy  of  observation  shown  by  the  builders.  They  were  not 
ignorant  that  stones  set  against  the  stratum  are  liable  to  split ; 
wherefore,  they  chose  them  with  particular  care  in  shallow,  very 
homogeneous  and  very  compact  ledges,  in  the  building-stone  at 
Paris,  in  the  hard  stones  of  Tonnerre1  in  Lower  Burgundy  and 
Champagne,  in  the  small  ledges  of  upper  Burgundy,  hard  as  sand- 
stone and  without  strata.2 

Experience  had  shown  them  that  certain  stones  that  were  hard  and 
fine  in  grain,  like  the  Cliquart  and  the  small  hard  ledge  at  Tonnerre, 
for  instance,  were  composed  of  very  thin  courses  of  limestone  set  one 
upon  another  and  united  by  a  solid  cement;  that  these  stones 
through  their  very  texture  have,  when  set  up  against  their  strata,  so 
to  speak,  an  extraordinary  strength ;  that  they  resist  enormous 
pressure,  and  that  when  heavily  loaded  with  a  powerful  weight  they 
split  less  readily  than  if  set  on  their  natural  bed,  for  what  makes 
these  stones  split  is  the  moisture  which  they  secrete  between  their 
thin  layers,  and  which  causes  the  particles  of  marl  to  swell ;  now,  if 
set  flat,  they  are  more  apt  to  preserve  that  moisture  than  if  set  up- 
right. In  this  latter  case  the  water  runs  along  their  sides  and  does 
not  penetrate  the  courses  resting  one  upon  another.  As  a  proof  of 
our  statement  we  might  cite  a  number  of  gutters,  drip-stones  and 
copings  made  of  slabs  of  Lias  or  Cliquart,  set  on  their  natural 
bed,  in  very  old  buildings,  and  frequently  found  to  be  split ;  while 
the  same  materials  in  the  same  structure  when  set  upright 
against  the  stratum  are  perfectly  preserved  and  are  injured  only 
through  accidents,  like  the  oxidation  of  cramp-irons  or  gudgeons, 
or  through  some  flaw. 

We  should  not  omit  here  one  important  fact  in  the  constructions 
of  the  Middle  Ages,  that  the  beds  are  cut  with  the  same  perfection 
as  the  facings  to  be  left  in  sight,  and  that  the  stones  are  always  set 

1  These  hard,  shallow  ledges  of  Tonnerre  are  no  longer  worked,  although  their 
qualities  are  excellent ;  they  are  called  forest  stones. 

2  Stones  of  Manse,  Dornecy,  Ravieres,  hard  Coutarnoux,  Anstrude,  Thisy  and 
Pouillenay. 


174 


MATERIALS. 


in  a  thick  bed  of  mortar  and  do  not  have  the  mortar  put  in  with  a 
trowel,  or  poured  in,  which  is  worse. 

In  conclusion,  and  to  end  this  digression  about  the  materials  suit- 
able for  building,  we  will  add  that  the  builders  of  the  first  Gothic 
period  have  regulated  their  system  of  construction  according  to  the 
materials  at  their  disposal,  and  consequently  the  forms  of  their 
architecture. 

A  Burgundian  architect  in  the  twelfth  century  did  not  build  at 
Dijon  as  at  Tonnerre  ;  for  if  we  find  in  the  same  province  the 
influence  of  the  same  school,  in  the  execution  of  the  masonry  we 
remark  considerable  difference  resulting  from  the  nature  of  the 
stone  employed.  But  as  in  each  province  there  is  one  prevailing 
kind  of  material,  the  architects  adopt  a  method  of  building  in 
conformity  with  the  nature  of  these  materials.  Burgundy,  so  rich 
in  stone  of  a  superior  quality,  furnishes  us  with  the  most  evident 
proof  of  this  fact. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 


Developments.    (Thirteenth  Century.) 
T  Dijon  there  exists  a  church  of  moderate  size,  under  the  name 


J  X  of  Notre  Dame  ;  it  was  built  about  1220,  and  it  is  a  master-piece 
of  reasoning,  in  which  the  science  of  the  builder  is  hidden  under  an 
apparent  simplicity.  We  shall  begin  by  giving  an  idea  of  the 
structure  of  this  edifice.    The  apse,  without  any  aisle,  opens  upon 


the  east  like  the  chancel  and  opening  into  the  transepts  in  the 
prolongation  of  the  aisles  of  the  nave. 

The  apse  of  Notre  Dame  at  Dijon  is  composed,  in  the  interior, 
only  of  a  thick  basement,  not  very  high,  carrying  isolated  piers  con- 
nected in  every  direction,  and  having  for  the  exterior  enclosure  only 
a  sort  of  partition  of  stone  pierced  by  windows.  Naturally  the  piers 
are  designed  to  support  the  vaults;  as  to  the  partitions,  they  sup- 
port nothing,  for  they  are  only  a  means  of  enclosure.  On  the 
outside  the  building  consists  only  of  plain  buttresses. 

Figure  75  gives  a  perspective  view  of  this  apse ;  since  it  has  no 
aisles,  the  buttresses  support  the  vaults  directly,  without  flying- 
buttresses.1 


the  transept ;  it  is  flanked  by  two  chapels  or  smaller  apses  facing 


•We  shall  be  permitted  one  remark  upon  this  subject:  while  appreciating 


Fig.  75.    Apse  of  Notre  Dame,  Dijon. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


177 


These  buttresses  are  thick  and  solid  and  in  them  alone  dwells  the 
stability  of  the  edifice.  Nothing  is  simpler  in  appearance  and  in 
reality  than  this  building.  Thin  walls  pierced  by  windows  close  all 
the  space  left  between  the  supports.  An  exterior  passage  is  left  at 
A,  to  facilitate  repairs  on  the  large  glass  windows.  All  the  facings 
are  well  protected  from  the  rain  by  sloping  roofs  without  offsets,  and 
by  cornices  or  copings. 

Clearly,  this  is  only  a  solid  envelope,  a  screen. 

Let  us  now  enter  the  Church  of  Notre  Dame  at  Dijon.  Just  as 
the  exterior  is  simple,  solid,  covered  and  screened,  so  the  interior 
presents  light  and  elegant  arrangements.  This  edifice  was  built  and 
still  is  situated  in  a  populous  quarter,  surrounded  by  narrow  streets, 
and  the  architect  has  felt  it  his  duty  to  sacrifice  everything  to  the 
interior  effect.  We  recognize,  moreover,  that  he  must  have  been 
limited  in  expense,  and  mu^t  have  avoided  useless  expenditure.  He 
was  chary  of  the  materials  and  did  not  use  one  stone  too  many. 
The  apse,  accordingly,  on  the  inside  (Fig.  76)  is  composed  of  a  thick 

more  or  less  the  merit  of  Gothic  religious  edifices,  some  critics  (who  are  not 
architects,  it  is  true)  have  claimed  that  of  all  the  churches  of  the  Middle  Ages 
in  France  the  most  perfect,  that  which  shows  on  the  part  of  the  architect  the 
highest  amount  of  talent,  is  the  Sainte  Chapelle  at  Paris,  for  that  church  keeps 
a  perfect  stability  without  the  aid  of  flying-buttresses  ;  and,  starting  from  this 
point,  the  same  critics,  happy  without  doubt  at  having  made  this  discovery,  have 
added  :  "  the  flying-buttress,  a  permanent  stone  support,  exposing  the  weakness 
of  the  builders,  is  thus  only  a  barbarous  over- growth,  a  useless  toy,  since  even 
during  the  Middle  Ages  skilful  artists  knew  how  to  do  without  it." 

The  argument  is  forcible  ;  but  the  Sainte  Chapelle  has  no  aisles,  and  at  the 
start,  the  architect  was  not  obliged  to  cross  that  space  and  transmit  the  thrusts 
of  the  great  vaults  outwards,  beyond  those  aisles.  It  is  thus,  nevertheless,  that 
people  nearly  always  talk  of  an  art  that  they  do  not  understand  and  the  multi- 
tude applaud,  for  the  professionals  do  not  think  it  necessary  to  refute  such 
arguments.  They  are  wrong  ;  for  an  error  repeated  a  hundred  times  even  by  the 
most  ignorant,  but  repeated  with  assurance,  ends  by  being  admitted  among 
the  most  undeniable  truths ;  and  we  still  see  printed  to-day,  in  perfect  good 
faith,  on  the  subject  of  the  arts,  and  especially  upon  Gothic  architecture, 
arguments  long  since  refuted  by  the  criticism  of  facts,  by  history,  by  monuments 
and  by  demonstrations  based  on  geometry. 

All  this  labor  of  truth  which  seeks  to  assert  itself  passes  unperceived  before 
the  eyes  of  certain  critics,  who  probably  boast  that  they  forget  nothing  and 
learn  nothing. 


Fig.  76.    Apse  of  Notre  Dame,  Dijono 


CONSTRUCTION. 


179 


basement,  A,  built  in  courses  and  ornamented  by  an  independent 
arcade  inlaid  in  the  wall.  From  this  basement  the  pillars  B  start 
and  rise  to  the  extremities  of  the  arches  of  the  great  vault.  These 
pillars  are  set  against  the  stratum  from  the  base  to  the  tablet  C, 
which  connects  them  in  a  moulding  to  the  outer  structure.  Over 
this  basement  is  a  passage  or  gallery,  designed  to  facilitate  access  to 
the  glass  windows  D,  and  to  decorate  the  church,  if  necessary,  on 
holy-days.  The  piers  E  are  detached ;  they  consist  of  four  columns 
set  against  the  cleavage  from  base  to  capitals,  a  large  one  (37  centi- 
metres in  diameter),  and  three  slender  ones  (from  12  to  15  cen- 
timetres in  diameter). 

In  A'  we  give  the  section  of  these  piers.  The  large  column  and 
the  two  at  its  side  are  each  in  one  piece  as  far  as  F,  the  course  of 
the  capitals,  while  the  pillar  starting  from  the  ground  is  in  one  piece 
as  far  as  the  tablet  G. 

This  tablet  G  forms  a  ceiling  over  the  lower  gallery,  and  connects 
the  large  arcade  with  the  outer  walls. 

At  the  height  of  the  gallery  on  the  third  row  (the  triforium)  there 
is  the  same  arrangement  of  the  piers  and  the  same  section  A'9 
only  an  intermediate  pillar,  H,  bearing  an  arcade  composed  itself  of 
large,  thin  pieces  of  stone,  like  slabs  (flags)  set  upright. 

Above  the  triforium,  a  second  flagging,  /,  serves  as  a  ceiling  for 
this  triforium,  and  attaches  the  arcade  to  the  outer  building  ;  next 
comes  the  starting-point  of  the  arches  of  the  large  vault,  supported 
by  the  exterior  buttresses. 

The  high  windows  then  open  above  the  archway  of  the  triforium 
and  are  no  longer  in  a  recess,  as  below,  in  order  to  give  all  the  light 
possible  and  to  leave  on  the  outside  the  passage  of  which  we  have 
spoken  before. 

Thus  the  thrust  of  the  arches  is  transmitted  obliquely  to  these 
exterior  buttresses,  which  are  built  in  courses,  and  the  inner  piers 
are  only  rigid  points  of  support,  incompressible  because  consisting 
of  large  stones  set  against  the  cleavage,  but  presenting,  because  of 
their  small  impost,  only  a  frame  capable  of  bending,  at  need,  to  one 


Construction  of  the  Apse,  Notre  Dame, 
Dijon. 


side  or  the  other,  without 
or  within,  without  danger, 
should  any  settling  occur. 

As  to  the  walls  K,  they 
are,  as  we  have  seen, 
only  partitions  20  centi- 
metres thick  at  the  ut- 
most.   Now  let  us  take 
away  from  this  structure 
everything  not  essential 
to   it,  let   us   take  its 
skeleton  and  this  is  what 
we  shall  find  (Fig.  77): 
A,  a  buttress,  built  up 
and  a  passive  mass ;  B,  a 
column,  slender  but  rigid 
and  resisting  like  cast- 
iron,  thanks  to  the  quali- 
ty of  limestone  used  ;  C, 
courses  at  the  height  of 
the   arches  and,  conse- 
quently, flexible  at  need ; 
D,  the   connection  be- 
tween interior  and  ex- 
terior ;   E,  a  second 
column,  but  shorter  than 
the  one  below,  for,  since 
it  is   higher   up,  any 
movement  taking  place 
there  would  have  more 
effect ;  F,  a  second 
course    joining  interior 
and   exterior;     G,  the 
skew-backs  of  the  arch- 
es ;  H,  simple  walls  that 
support  nothing  and 
serve  only  to  enclose  the 


182   DEVELOPMENTS   {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 


building ;  /,  the  abutment  placed  only  at  the  point  where  the  thrust 
of  the  arch  acts. 

There  is  nothing  too  much,  but  everything  that  is  necessary,  for 
this  construction  has  stood  for  more  than  six  centuries,  and  does  not 
yet  seem  near  its  fall. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  recall  here  what  we  have  said  about  the 
function  of  the  monolithic  pillars  that  accompany  the  columns  B  and 
E,  and  which  we  have  supposed  removed  in  Figure  77.  They  are 
only  accessory  supports  which  give  firmness  and  stability  to  the  prin- 
cipal columns,  without  being  absolutely  indispensable. 

The  weight  of  the  vaults  rests  far  more  upon  the  buttresses, 
because  of  the  action  of  the  thrust,  than  upon  the  cylinders  B  and 
E  (see  Fig.  33). 

As  the  interior  clusters  of  pillars  carry  only  a  very  slight  weight, 
there  was  no  need  of  giving  them  great  resistance.  But  if  we  had 
an  aisle,  if  the  buttresses,  instead  of  being  immediately  opposed  to 
the  action  of  the  vaults,  were  removed  by  the  whole  width  of  this 
aisle,  then  the  vertical  piers  should  have  a  larger  impost,  for  they 
really  would  carry  the  weight  of  the  vaults. 

The  nave  of  this  same  Church  of  Notre  Dame  at  Dijon  is  vaulted 
according  to  the  early  Gothic  method. 

The  diagonal  arches  are  on  a  square  plan  and  are  cut  by  a  trans- 
verse arch. 

The  lower  piers  are  cylindrical,  built  in  drums  and  of  equal 
diameter.  Still,  each  pair  of  capitals  differs  somewhat,  for  they 
carry  alternately  either  a  transverse  and  two  diagonal  arches  or  one 
transverse  arch  only.  We  give  (Fig.  78)  the  view  of  an  inner 
division  of  the  nave  of  Notre  Dame  at  Dijon. 

At  A'  we  have  drawn  the  section  of  the  impost  A,  in  B'  the  sec- 
tion of  the  impost  B,  with  the  horizontal  projection  of  the  abaci  of 
the  capitals.  These  capitals  jut  out  farther  on  the  side  of  the  nave,  to 
receive  the  pillars  which  rise  to  the  beginning  of  the  vaults,  always  in 
accordance  with  the  principle  which  consists  in  moving  back  the  ver- 
tical supports  so  as  to  draw  off  a  part  of  the  thrusts  (see  Fig.  34). 


CONSTRUCTION. 


183 


In  C  we  give  the  horizontal  section  of  the  piers  C,  and  in  D'  that 
of  the  piers  D,  at  the  level  of  the  triforium,  at  E'  the  horizontal  sec- 
tion of  the  skew-backs  E,  and  at  F  that  of  the  skew-backs  F,  on  a 
level  with  the  abaci  receiving  the  great  vaults. 

This  general  sketch  having 
been  given,  let  us  examine  with 
care  the  structure  of  this  nave. 

We  have  already  said  that 
the  architect  of  Notre  Dame 
at  Dijon  had  at  his  disposal 
a  limited  area  crowded  in  be- 
tween narrow  streets ;  so  he 
could  not  give  to  the  buttresses 
of  the  nave  supporting  the  whole 
system  a  great  projection  beyond 
the  perimeter  of  the  aisles. 

If  he  had  followed  the  methods 
adopted  in  his  time,  if  he  had 
remained  submissive  to  routine, 
or,  to  be  more  accurate,  to  the 
rules  already  established  by  ex- 
perience, he  would  have  designed 
the  flying-buttresses  of  the  nave 
as  indicated  in  Figure  79. 

The  thrust  of  the  great  vault 
acting  from  A  to  B,  he  would 
have  placed  the  last  voussoir  of 
the  arch  at  A  and  its  coping  at  B  and  he  would  have  moved  the 
front  of  the  buttress  from  C  in  such  a  way  that  the  oblique  line  of 
the  thrusts  should  not  pass  the  point  G.  But  he  cannot  go  beyond 
the  point  I:  since  the  width  reserved  for  the  public  road  does  not 
allow  it ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  on  the  interior  he  cannot  pass  the 
point  K,  which  is  on  the  vertical  of  the  engaged  pier  L,  without 


Fig.  79. 


184   DEVELOPMENTS    {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 

causing  a  false  bearing  and  of  breaking  the  transverse  arch  M,  whose 
curve  it  is  important  to  keep;  for  if  a  too  considerable  weight  acts 
upon  the  haunches  of  that  arch  at  N,  that  arch  will  push  the 
detached  pier  on  the  interior  in  the  direction  0  P.  Hence  the 
architect  must  fix  the  pier  of  his  flying-buttress  in  the  space  in- 
cluded between  K  and  F.  But  we  know  that  this  pier  must  be 
passive,  immovable,  for  it  is  the  true  point  of  support  for  the  whole 
system  ;  and  it  can  evidently  acquire  that  immovability  (its  narrow 
base  being  taken  into  consideration)  only  by  a  particular  arrangement, 
a  supplementary  vertical  resistance.  Accordingly,  the  constructor 
solves  the  problem  as  follows :  he  builds  the  pier  between  the  two 
points  desired  (Fig.  79&)  ;  he  loads  heavily  the  summit  of  the  flying- 
buttress  at  A  ;  he  slopes  the  coping  B  C  so  as  to  make  it  tangent  to 
the  extrados  of  the  arch;  then  he  brings  the  rear  surface  of  the 
pinnacle  D,  over  to  the  point  E  out  of  the  vertical  of  the  wall  F,  so 
that  the  space  P  F  may  be  a  little  less  than  a  third  of  the  space  F 
G.  Thus  the  thrust  of  the  great  vault  is  strongly  opposed,  in  the 
first  place,  by  the  weight  A  and  is  neutralized  by  that  pressure ;  so 
that  now  only  the  flying-buttress  itself  acts  upon  the  pier  K,  so  far  as 
it  is  loaded  at  A.  Accordingly,  if  that  arch  were  to  be  put  out  of 
shape,  it  would  be  in  accordance  with  the  drawing  R;  it  would 
break  at  S  and  the  pier  K  would  bend. 

But  the  architect  moves  back  his  pinnacle  and  loads  the  pier  out- 
side of  its  perpendicular  as  far  as  the  point  E,  that  is  to  say,  as  far 
as  the  point  where  the  rupture  of  the  flying-buttress  might  take 
place ;  he  thus  checks  that  rupture,  for  under  its  load  the  point  Sf 
of  the  flying-buttress  cannot  be  displaced;  but  the  pinnacle  D  only 
presses  against  the  arch,  while  it  does  not  weight  it,  since  the  space 
C  0  is  greater  than  the  space  OP;  hence  the  weight  of  the  pinna- 
cle, which  is  a  well-built,  homogeneous  construction  of  large  stones, 
rests  on  0  C,  the  centre  of  gravity  of  the  pinnacle  being  between 
0  and  C ;  consequently  if  the  arch  were  torn  down,  this  pinnacle 
would  remain  upright;    thus  it  loads  the  pier  K,  with  a  greater 


Fig.  796. 


186   DEVELOPMENTS   {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 

weight  than  that  of  a  pinnacle  having  only  F  G  in  breadth  ;  and 
hence  assures  in  this  way  the  stability  of  the  pier  F  G,  too  feeble  by 
itself  to  resist  the  thrust  without  the  addition  of  this  weight,  while,  at 
the  same  time,  he  compresses  the  haunches  of  the  flying-buttress  at 
the  point  where  that  arch  would  tend  to  break  if  thrust  out  of  place. 

Fact  is  more  conclusive  than  all  logical  deductions ;  the  construc- 
tion of  the  nave  of  Notre  Dame  at  Dijon,  in  spite  of  slightness  of  its 
exterior  supports,  has  not  undergone  the  least  deformation.  Let  us 
not  lose  sight  of  the  interior ;  let  us  notice  that  the  vaults  do  not 
push  directly  upon  the  tops  of  the  flying-buttresses  and  that  between 
the  tops  of  these  arches  and  the  skew-back  of  the  vault  there  exists, 
above  the  triforium  U,  an  interior  support  V  just  at  the  height  of 
that  thrust,  neutralizing  its  action  in  a  singular  manner.  Let  us 
study  the  details:  the  block  of  stone  T,  against  which  the  last 
voussoir  of  the  flying-buttress  rests,  is  no  other  than  the  lintel  carry- 
ing the  support  of  which  we  were  just  speaking  and  at  the  same 
height  as  this  lintel  are  fixed  the  two  capitals  which  carry  the  wall- 
arches  of  the  vault  (see  Fig.  78).  This  lintel  is  set  just  on  the  level 
of  the  action  of  the  thrust  from  the  great  vault. 

Let  us  analyze  this  construction  piece  by  piece  (Fig.  80). 

We  see  at  A  the  column,  the  principal  support  of  the  triforium  at 
the  height  of  the  piers  carrying  the  extremities  of  one  transverse  and 
two  diagonal  arches,  a  support  flanked  by  the  two  lesser  columns  B. 

At  C  are  the  large  pillars  set  against  the  stratum  upon  the  abacus 
of  the  large  capital  on  the  ground-floor  and  passing  in  front  of  the 
group  B  A  B  in  order  to  arrive  under  the  course  M  of  the  capitals  of 
the  arches  of  the  great  vault ;  a  course  consisting  of  a  single  stone. 

At  D  is  the  capital  of  the  triforium. 

At  E  is  the  skew-back  of  the  arcade  of  the  triforium,  also  consist- 
ing of  one  stone. 

At  F  are  the  two  blocks  closing  the  arcade. 

At  G  is  the  course  forming  the  ceiling  of  the  triforium  and  con- 
necting the  arcade  and  the  course  of  the  capitals  M  to  the  exterior 


Fig.  80. 


188     DEVELOPMENTS  {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 


support,  under  the  roof,  a  support  whose  courses  are  drawn  at  H. 

At  G'  is  one  of  the  slabs,  placed  next  to  that  at  G  and  connecting 
the  rest  of  the  arcade  to  the  partition  built  under  the  upper  windows, 
of  which  /  is  the  sill. 

These  slabs  G'  carry  the  fillet  K,  projecting  over  the  roof  of  the 
aisle. 

At  L  is  the  first  section  of  the  exterior  buttress  seen  above  the 
roof. 

At  M  is  the  course  of  the  capitals  of  the  great  vaults,  carrying 
the  bases  of  the  two  pillars,  set  against  the  stratum,  which  sustain 
the  wall-arches. 

At  N  is  the  skew-back  of  the  great  vaults,  whose  upper  bed  is 
horizontal  and  which  carries  the  extremities  of  the  two  diagonal 
and  the  transverse  arches. 

At  0  is  the  second  skew-back  carrying  the  two  diagonal  arches  and 
the  transverse  arch,  the  upper  bed  of  the  latter  being  now  normal  to 
the  curve,  while  the  beds  of  the  two  diagonal  arches  are  still  horizontal. 

At  P  is  the  third  skew-back,  no  longer  carrying  the  transverse 
arch,  which  is  henceforth  independent,  but  still  carrying  the  two 
diagonal  arches  whose  beds  are  horizontal. 

At  Q  is  the  fourth  skew-back,  carrying  nothing  but  the  shoulder- 
piece  behind  the  diagonal  arches,  for  laying  the  first  filling-stones. 

At  R  is  the  lintel,  of  which  we  were  just  speaking  and  which  con- 
nects the  skew-baeks  with  the  pier  whose  courses  are  at  S;  this 
lintel  carries  the  shoulder-pieces  behind  the  diagonal  arches,  for  it  is 
important  to  give  firm  support  to  these  now  independent  diagonal 
arches  whose  voussoirs  are  represented  at  T,  while  one  of  the 
voussoirs  of  the  transverse  arch  is  given  at  V. 

At  A!  is  the  course  of  the  exterior  buttress  carrying  the  ledges 
of  the  windows,  the  bases  of  the  exterior  pillars  of  these  windows 
and  the  fillet  passing  above  the  list  (or  fillet-ridge)  of  the  roof,  as 
the  perspective  detail  Y  indicates. 

The  terminus  of  the  voussoirs  of  the  flying-buttresses  then  rest 


CONSTRUCTION. 


189 


against  the  lintel  R  and,  beginning  with  the  lintel,  the  interval  be- 
tween the  pier  and  the  vault  is  filled  (see  the  interior  view,  Fig.  78). 

If  we  examine  the  section  (Fig.  795),  we  see  that  the  but- 
tress X,  the  wall  of  the  triforium  Y,  the  passage  Z  and  the  inner 
pier  present  a  considerable  thickness ;  for  the  passage  is  quite  wide 
and  the  wall  and  buttress  together  measure  about  60  centimetres 
and  the  group  of  columns  forming  the  inner  pier  about  50  centi- 
metres. 

Xow,  all  this  must  rest  upon  a  single  capital,  crowning  a  cylindri- 
cal column. 

There  will  be  evidently  an  imperfect  balance  and  if  the  buttress 
X  bears  upon  the  haunches  of  the  transverse  arch  of  the  aisle,  the 
pressure  that  it  will  exert  will  push  the  column  inward  and  make  it 
lose  its  upright  position  and,  the  upright  position  once  lost,  the 
whole  equilibrium  of  the  building  is  destroyed. 

The  builder  has  at  first  given  to  the  capital  (Fig.  81)  the  form 
A  ;  that  is,  he  has  moved  the  axis  of  the  column  into  the  vertical 
plane  passing  through  the  middle  of  the  archivolt  B. 

Upon  this  capital  he  has  placed  the  two  skew-back  stones  C  and 
D,  with  their  beds  horizontal :  the  first  skew-back  C,  carrying  the 
bases  of  the  pillars  set  against  the  stratum  and  rising  to  the  begin- 
ning of  the  great  vaults,  while  the  third  skew-back  E  has  its  sections 
normal  to  the  curves  of  the  transverse  arch,  the  diagonal  arches  and 
archivolts,  for,  on  starting  from  this  skew-back  the  arches  detach 
themselves  from  one  another. 

Having  set  free  the  arches,  which  henceforth  are  laid  in  inde- 
pendent voussoirs,  the  builder  has  erected  a  pier,  having  projections 
to  the  right  and  left,  F,  G,  II,  I,  K,  in  corbels,  up  to  the  vertical  of 
the  buttress  L  ,  and  in  the  course  /,  he  has  taken  care  to  reserve 
two  skew-backs  M,  to  receive  the  arches  sustaining  the  wail  of  the 
triforium  N. 

The  interior  pier  0,  composed,  as  we  have  said  before,  of  a  cluster 
of  pillars,  set  against  the  stratum,  rests  upon  the  inner  part  of  that 


190    DEVELOPMENTS  {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 


pier.  It  is  understood  that  its  courses  F,  G,  H,  I,  K,  are  each  in 
one  piece  and  strong. 

The  heaviest  weight  and  the  most  stubborn  resistance  are  those  of 

the  pier  0,  since  it 
carries  vertically  the 
buttressed  vaults; 
for  the  buttress  L 
carries  almost  noth- 
ing, since  the  summit 
of  the  flying-buttress 
does  not  weigh  upon 
it  (see  Fig.  796),  and 
it  merely  keeps  the 
structure  in  equilib- 
rium. Accordingly 
the  stones  K,  I,  H, 
being  weighted  at  the 
ends  K'  I'  H',  cannot 
sway  ;  hence  the  but- 
tress is  held  firm. 

As  to  the  thrust  of 
the  transverse  arch 
P,  and  that  of  the 
diagonal  arches  o  f 
the  aisle,  it  is  wholly 
neutralized  by  the 
weight  which  presses 
downwards  in  the 
vertical  of  the  pier 
0.  It  is  now  under- 
stood how  essential 
Fig.  81.  it  is  that  the  pier  O 

should  be  composed  of  large  stones  set  upon  end  and  not  of  courses, 


CONSTRUCTION.  191 
for  this  pier  supports  a  twofold  pressure  :  that  from  above  down- 


192    DEVELOPMENTS  {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 


upward,  in  consequence  of  the  tendency  to  tip,  produced  by  the 
buttress  L  upon  the  ends  of  the  stones  K,  I. 

If,  then,  these  piers  0  were  built  in  courses,  it  might  happen  that 
the  mortar  joints,  if  strongly  compressed,  by  that  twofold  action, 
would  diminish  in  thickness ;  now  the  least  settling  in  height  of  the 
piers  0  would  result  in  deranging  the  equilibrium  of  the  entire 
system. 

On  the  contrary,  the  leverage  produced  by  the  courses  I  and  K, 
under  the  pier  O  has  the  result  (those  pillars  being  perfectly  rigid 
and  incompressible)  of  sustaining  very  firmly  the  starting  point  of 
the  great  vaults. 

We  shall  the  better  understand  this  system  of  building  by  suppos- 
ing, for  example,  that  in  order  to  execute  it,  cast-iron,  stone  and 
wood  have  been  employed  (Fig.  82.) 

Let  the  column  A  and  its  capital  of  cast-iron  be  set  upon  a  pedestal 
of  stone  and  let  them  support  the  stone  skew-back  B. 

The  builder  gives  a  broader  projection  to  the  capital  toward  the 
interior  of  the  nave  than  on  the  side  of  the  aisle.  Upon  this  capital 
he  raises  the  courses  B,  C,  D,  E,  F,  G,  etc.,  in  the  form  of  corbels. 
He  sets  three  iron  columns  H  along  the  inner  wall  and  augments 
them  by  three  other  columns  H'  (see  section  H"~)  ;  these  columns 
H  H'  are  attached  to  the  buttress  /  by  rings  and  a  cramp-iron  K,  in 
order  to  make  the  buttress  fast  to  the  pier  and  to  hinder  the  round- 
ing outward  of  either. 

The  buttress  I  is  built  of  courses  of  stone.  Upon  the  columns 
H H',  the  architect  places  the  skew-backs  L  of  the  great  vault;  the 
two  side  columns  0  0  continue  alone  up  to  the  lintel  M  which  but- 
tresses the  arches  of  the  great  vaults. 

On  the  outside  he  raises  a  pier  N  of  stone,  in  order  to  be  able  to 
keep  the  interior  structure  in  the  vertical,  by  means  of  the  prop  P, 
strengthened  to  prevent  its  displacement,  by  the  cross-pieces  R. 

There  is  no  inconvenience,  on  the  contrary,  in  case  the  buttress  /, 
built  in  courses,  should  be  compressed,  or  should  settle;  for  the 


CONSTRUCTION. 


193 


lower  the  point  Q  falls,  the  more  rigid  will  be  the  prop  P  against 
the  back  of  the  lintel  M.  Nevertheless,  this  buttress  I  is  needed  to 
keep  the  back  of  the  lintel  M  in  a  horizontal  plane,  but  most  of  all 
to  give  stability  to  the  column  A.  In  fact,  one  need  not  be  very 
well  versed  in  the  knowledge  of  the  laws  of  equilibrium  to  know 
that  if,  between  a  column  Y  and  a  column  S,  both  slender  (Fig. 
82b)  we  place  several  horizontal  courses,  it  will  be  impossible, 
however  well  loaded  the  column  S  may  be  and  however  well 
propped  may  be  the  courses,  in  one  sense,  to  keep  these  two  columns 
in  a  vertical  plane,  parallel  to  the  plane  of  the  props;  while,  placing 
on  the  column  T  (Fig.  82c)  horizontal  courses  V  propped  in 
one  direction  and  upon  these  courses  two  pillars  X  X'  passing 
through  a  vertical  plane  perpendicular  to  the  plane  of  the  props 
(always  supposing  the  two  pillars  X  X'  to  be  loaded)  we  shall  be 
able  to  keep  the  columns  X  X'  and  T  in  planes  parallel  to  the  props. 
In  this  consists  the  entire  system  of  construction  of  Gothic  naves  set 
upon  columns. 

That  is  the  explanation  of  the  galleries  set  one  above  another  in 
Burgundian  architecture,  a  sort  of  hollow  buttress  whose  inner  wall 
is  rigid  and  its  outer  wall  compressible,  thus  giving  great  strength  of 
resistance  and  of  impost  to  the  springings  of  the  high  vaults,  avoid- 
ing enormous  abutments  to  support  the  flying-buttresses  and  destroy- 
ing, by  its  equilibrium  and  its  pressure  upon  two  distant  points,  the 
effect  of  the  thrusts  from  the  vaults  of  the  aisles. 

In  truth,  all  this  may  well  appear  complicated,  subtle  and  labored ; 
but  it  will  certainly  be  conceded  us  that  it  is  ingenious,  very  skilful 
and  scientific,  and  that  the  authors  of  this  system  have  made  no 
confusion  of  Grecian  art  with  the  art  of  the  North ;  of  the  Roman 
with  the  Oriental ;  that  they  have  not  put  caprice  in  the  place  of 
reason  and  that  there  is  in  these  constructions  more  than  the  appear- 
ance of  a  logical  system. 

AVe  freely  admit  that  one  may  prefer  a  Grecian,  Roman  or  even  a 
Romanesque  construction  to  that  of  the  church  of  Notre  Dame  at 


194    DEVELOPMENTS  (THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 


Dijon ;  but  we  shall  certainly  be  permitted  to  believe  that  there  is 
much  to  be  gained  here,  by  us  architects  of  the  nineteenth  century, 
called  upon  to  raise  very  complicated  edifices,  to  strive  with  matter, 
while  possessing  materials  very  different  in  nature,  properties  and 
mode  of  use;  forced  to  arrange  our  constructions  in  view  of  new 
needs,  of  widely  varying  purposes,  very  different  from  those  of  the 
ancients ;  .  .  .  that  there  is  more  to  be  gained  here,  we  repeat,  than 
from  the  primitive  and  simple  structure  of  the  Temple  of  Minerva  at 
Athens,  or  even  than  from  the  solid  immovable  structure  of  the 
Pantheon  at  Rome. 

It  is  unfortunate  that  we  could  not  always  build  like  the  ancients  and 
perpetually  observe  the  very  simple  and  very  beautiful  rules  of  the 
Greek  or  Roman  builders ;  but  we  cannot  reasonably  build  a  rail- 
road-station, a  market,  a  hall  for  our  assemblies,  a  bazaar  or  an  ex- 
change, in  accordance  with  the  workings  of  the  Grecian  or  even  of 
the  Roman  system,  while  the  supple  principles  already  applied  by  the 
architects  of  the  Middle  Ages,  after  careful  study,  place  us  upon 
the  modern  path,  that  of  incessant  progress.  This  study  permits  us 
every  innovation,  the  use  of  all  kinds  of  material  without  abandon- 
ing the  principles  established  by  these  architects,  since  these  princi- 
ples consist  essentially  in  submitting  everything,  materials,  form, 
general  arrangements  and  details  to  the  reason  ;  in  reaching  the 
utmost  limit  of  possibility,  in  substituting  the  resources  of  industry 
for  inert  force  and  the  search  after  the  unknown  for  tradition. 

It  is  certain  that  if  the  Gothic  builders  had  had  at  their  disposal 
large  pieces  of  cast-iron,  they  would  not  have  failed  to  use  that  sub- 
stance in  their  buildings  and  I  would  not  guarantee  that  they  would 
not  sooner  have  arrived  at  results  more  judicious  and  more  logical 
than  those  obtained  in  our  time,  for  they  would  have  taken  that  sub- 
stance frankly  for  what  it  is,  profiting  by  all  the  advantages  that  it 
presents  and  without  trying  to  give  it  other  forms  than  those  appro- 
priate to  it.  Their  system  of  building  would  have  allowed  them  to 
use  at  the  same  time  cast-iron  and  stone,  a  thing  that  no  one  has 


CONSTRUCTION. 


195 


dared  to  attempt,  during  our  epoch;  so  much  power  has  routine  over 
our  builders,  who  never  cease  talking  about  progress,  like  the  singers 
in  the  opera,  who  cry  "  Let  us  start ! "  for  a  quarter  of  an  hour 
without  moving  from  the  stage. 

We  are  not  aware  that  any  one  has  attempted,  in  France,  up  to 
the  present  day,  unless  it  is  in  the  building  of  houses  in  several  large 
cities,  to  place  considerable  masses  of  masonry,  vaults  of  brick  or 
even  of  stone,  good  structures  well  planned  and  executed,  upon  de- 
tached supports  of  cast-iron. 

It  is  because  classic  teaching  can  hardly  permit  these  attempts, 
which  the  architects  of  the  Middle  Ages  would  certainly  not  have 
failed  to  make  and  probably  with  entire  success. 

We  certainly  cannot  reproach  the  Gothic  builders  with  stopping 
halfway ;  we  shall  see  with  what  ardor  they  throw  themselves  into 
the  more  and  more  rigorous  application  of  the  principles  which  they 
have  laid  down,  and  how  they  succeed,  in  a  few  years,  in  carrying 
these  principles  to  their  limit,  in  using  materials  with  an  exact  knowl- 
edge of  their  qualities  and  in  mastering  the  most  intricate  problems 
of  descriptive  geometry. 

The  Church  of  Notre  Dame  at  Dijon  is  a  small  edifice  and  one 
might  suppose  that  the  Burgundian  architects  of  the  first  half  of  the 
thirteenth  century  did  not  permit  themselves  similar  hardihood  in 
monuments  with  broad  extent  of  surface  and  very  high.  It  is  the 
contrary  which  takes  place;  it  seems  that  working  on  a  large  scale 
these  builders  gather  more  assurance  and  develop  with  still  more 
boldness  their  means  of  execution. 

The  choir  of  the  Cathedral  of  St.  Stephen  at  Auxerre  was  rebuilt 
from  1215  to  1230,  over  a  Romanesque  crypt  (see  Crypte),  which 
led  to  the  adoption  of  certain  arrangements,  unusual  in  the  large 
churches  of  that  period.  Thus  the  chancel  is  surrounded  by  u 
simple  aisle  with  single  square  apsidal  chapel. 

As  to  its  construction,  it  presents  a  perfect  analogy,  in  the  lower 
part,  to  the  Church  of  Notre  Dame  at  Dijon.    At  Auxerre,  neverthe- 


196    DEVELOPMENTS  (THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 

less,  the  structure  is  lighter  yet  and  certain  difficulties  resulting 
from  the  Romanesque  arrangement  of  the  plan,  which  they  did  not 
wish  to  change,  have  been  solved  in  the  most  ingenious  manner. 


Fig.  83.    Chapel  of  the  Holy  Virgin,  Cathedral  of  St.  Stephen,  Auxerre. 

We  give  (Fig.  83)  half  of  the  plan  of  the  apsidal  chapel,  sacred 
to  the  Holy  Virgin.  This  plan  is  taken  at  the  height  of  the  ci- 
lery of  the  ground-floor,  resting,  as  in  Notre  Dame  at  Dijon,  upon  an 


4 


F.g.  84.    From  the  Chapel  of  the  Holy  Virgin,  Cathedral  of  St.  Stephen,  Auxerre. 


198    DEVELOPMENTS  {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 

arcade.  At  X,  we  have  represented,  on  a  smaller  scale,  the  horizon- 
tal projection  of  the  vault  of  the  aisle  in  front  of  that  chapel. 

According  to  the  Burgundian  method  the  wall-arches  are  detached 
from  the  wall,  they  rest  upon  the  pillars  A  B,  C  D,  E  F,  G  H,  etc., 
set  against  the  stratum. 

The  central  pillars,  likewise  set  against  the  stratum,  sustain  the 
force  of  the  pressure  and  the  vault  consists  of  two  diagonal  arches 
/  K  and  L  M,  one  transverse  arch  N  0  and  the  intermediate 
arches  P  Q  and  R  S. 

These  two  intermediate  arches  fall,  at  the  right  of  the  aisle,  upon 
two  detached  columns  Q  and  S,  set  against  the  stratum,  each  in  one 
piece  and  having  twenty-four  centimetres  of  diameter  to  six  metres 
sixty  centimetres  of  height  from  base  to  capital.  The  difficulty  was 
to  neutralize  so  exactly  the  different  thrusts,  acting  on  these  columns 
Q  S,  that  they  could  not  leave  the  vertical. 

It  was  a  problem  to  be  solved,  similar  to  that  which  the  builder  of 
the  chapels  of  Notre  Dame  at  Chalons-sur-Marne  had  set  before 
himself,  but  upon  a  much  larger  scale  and  with  points  of  support 
incomparably  more  slender. 

Let  us  take  our  stand  for  an  instant  in  the  aisle  and  look  at  the 
summit  of  the  column  S,  whose  diameter,  as  we  have  already  said,  is 
only  twenty-four  centimetres.  Upon  this  column  is  placed  a  capital, 
whose  abacus  is  octagonal  and  broad  enough  to  receive  the  beginning 
of  the  two  arches  S  T  and  S  R  and  in  addition  two  small  columns 
carrying  the  transverse  arches  S  Q  and  S  Y. 

A  tall  skew-back,  whose  lower  bed  is  at  A  (Fig.  84)  and  its  upper 
bed  at  B,  is  reinforced  in  the  angles  obtained  between  the  arches 
and  the  pillars  by  sheaves  of  foliage.  Up  to  the  level  of  the  abacus 
of  the  capital  C,  the  arch  D  of  the  aisle  rises  and  curves  already,  by 
means  of  two  other  skew-backs  with  horizontal  beds,  while  the  arch 
E  (the  intermediate  arch  of  the  chapel)  of  a  greater  diameter  is 
farther  out  of  the  vertical  and  is  composed,  after  leaving  the  bed  B, 
of  independent  voussoirs. 


COXSTRUCTION. 


199 


The  pillars,  F,  of  the  transverse  arches  at  the  entrance  of  the 
chapel  are  monoliths  and  balance  these  skew-backs,  keep  them  rigid, 
and  rest  firmly  upon  the  two  faces  of  the  abacus.  Figure  85  gives 
the  section  of  the  beginning  of  the  vaults  at  the  level  G  H.  This 


Fig.  85. 

construction  is  bold,  one  cannot  deny,  but  it  is  perfectly  solid,  as 
during  six  centuries  and  more  it  has  undergone  no  alteration. 

We  see  in  this  one  of  the  most  ingenious  applications  of  the  Gothic 
system  of  vaults,  the  unequivocal  proof  of  the  freedom  of  the  builders, 
of  their  sureness  of  execution  and  their  perfect  familiarity  with  the 
resistance  of  materials. 


200    DEVELOPMENTS  {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 


These  pillars  are  made  from  the  hard  stone  of  Tonnerre,  as  also 
the  skew-backs. 

As  to  the  effect  produced  by  this  chapel  and  its  entrance,  it  is 
surprising,  but  does  not  inspire  that  anxiety  which  every  too-daring 
attempt  causes. 

The  arches  buttress  one  another  so  well  not  only  in  reality  but 
also  in  appearance,  that  the  eye  is  satisfied. 

Even  to  that  fourfold  sheaf  of  foliage  surmounting  the  capital 
and  giving  body  to  the  lowest  skew-backs,  everything  concurs  in 
reassuring  the  observer. 

Some  one  may  object  to  these  two  columns  at  the  entrance. 

Why  is  not  the  architect  content  with  throwing  a  transverse  arcli 
from  one  pier  at  the  angle  of  the  chapel  to  the  other  ? 

To  this  there  is  but  one  reply ;  let  us  turn  back  to  Figures 
41,  42  and  44,  and  the  explanation  is  given;  it  is  necessary, 
because  of  the  radiating  form  of  the  aisle,  to  obtain  upon  the  outer 
boundary  a  greater  number  of  points  of  support  than  upon  the 
inner  boundary,  in  order  to  have  the  transverse  arches  almost  equal 
at  the  base  and  exactly  equal  under  the  key,  to  close  the  triangles  of 
the  vaults  at  the  same  level. 

If  the  vaults  of  the  chapel  of  the  Holy  Virgin  and  of  the  aisle  of  the 
Cathedral  of  Auxerre  are  arranged  like  the  majority  of  Burgundian 
vaults  of  the  thirteenth  century,  that  is,  if  their  wall-arches  are 
distinct  from  the  walls  and  if  a  flagging  supporting  a  water-channel 
unites  these  wall-arches  to  the  tops  of  the  walls,  the  architect  of  the 
choir  has  probably  not  believed  that  this  process  of  construction  was 
solid  enough  to  finish  off  the  great  vaults  of  the  principal  nave. 

He  has  had  to  fear  the  equilibrium  of  this  system  in  a  very  vast 
edifice  and  he  has  chosen  a  middle  course  between  the  system  of 
Champagne  and  that  of  Burgundy. 

The  system  of  Champagne  certainly  consists  in  detaching  the  wall- 
arch  from  the  wall,  but  also  in  fastening  between  this  wall-arch  and 
the  wall  a  cradle-vault  over  the  extrados  of  the  aforesaid  wall-arch. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


201 


Let  us  examine  then  in  what  the  system  of  Champagne  consists. 
We  see  it  reaching  its  zenith  in  a  little  edifice  of  the  Marne,  the 
Church  of  Rieux,  near  Montmirail. 

We  first  give  (Fig  86)  half  of  the  plan  of  the  apse  of  this  pretty- 
church.    It  is  seen  that  this  plan  strongly  resembles  that  of  the  apse 


Fig.  86.    Apse  of  the  Church  at  Rieux  on  the  Marne. 


of  Notre  Dame  at  Dijon.  But  we  are  in  Champagne,  in  a  territory 
where  materials  of  resistance  and  great  size  are  rare  ;  accordingly 
the  small  piers  A  are  no  longer  composed  of  columns  set  against  the 
stratum  ;  they  are  groups  of  attached  columns  presenting  a  large 


202     DEVELOPMENTS  {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 


enough  section  to  be  built  in  courses.  Furthermore,  these  piers, 
instead  of  being  tall,  are  short. 

Let  us  now  examine  the  apse  at  Rieux  in  the  interior  (Fig.  87)  ; 
we  see  at  B  the  cradle-vaults  concentric  to  the  wall-arches,  extend- 
ing towards  them,  circumscribing  the  windows  and  supporting  the 
beams  of  the  roof  and  outer  cornice.1 

Accordingly,  here  are  two  adjoining  provinces,  Burgundy  and 
Champagne,  both  of  which  start  from  the  same  principle  of  construc- 
tion. But  in  the  first  of  these  provinces,  the  materials  adapted  to 
masonry  are  abundant,  hard  and  easy  to  extract  in  large  pieces  and 
the  constructions  partake  of  the  qualities  peculiar  to  Burgundian 
limestone ;  in  the  second,  on  the  contrary,  are  found  only  beds  of 
chalk  or  marl,  of  very  little  solidity  and  impossible  to  extract  from 
the  quarries  except  in  small  "pieces  ;  hence  the  architects  regulate 
their  mode  of  construction  by  the  nature  of  the  stone  of  their 
province. 

The  Church  of  Rieux  dates  from  the  first  years  of  the  thirteenth 
century ;  its  sculpture  belongs  almost  to  the  twelfth. 

Champagne  is  in  advance  of  Burgundy  and  even  of  Ile-de-France, 
when  it  is  a  question  of  developing  the  principles  of  Gothic  con- 
struction. 

Already,  the  windows  of  the  apse  at  Rieux  are  provided  with  mul- 
lions  set  against  the  stratum,  while  in  Ile-de-France  they  are  not 
seen  until  twenty  years  later  and  in  Burgundy  only  about  1260. 

The  method  indicated  in  Figure  87  for  the  construction  of  the 
vaults  and  the  piers  that  support  them  is  applied  in  the  apsidal 
chapel  of  the  Church  of  Sainte  Remy  of  Rheims,  earlier  by  twenty 
years,  at  least,  than  the  apsis  of  the  Church  of  Rieux  ;  it  is  developed 
in  the  Cathedral  of  Rheims,  in  all  the  vaults  of  the  chapels  and  of 
the  great  nave  [see  "  Cathedrale,"  Fig.  14,  «  Chapelle,"  Fig.  36]. 

Let  us  now  return  to  the  Cathedral  of  Auxerre  and  let  us  examine 

1M.  Millet  has  had  the  goodness  to  sketch  for  us  this  charming  little  edifice, 
so  very  little  known,  the  best  type  perhaps,  of  the  architecture  of  Champagne  at 
the  beginning  of  the  thirteenth  century. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


203 


Fig.  87.    Apse  of  the  Church  at  Rieux  on  the  Marne. 


204    DEVELOPMENTS   {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 


the  advantage  that  its  architect  has  been  able  to  derive  from  the 
two  methods,  of  Burgundy  and  of  Champagne. 

We  give  (Fig.  88)  a  view  in  the  interior  of  the  upper  part  of  the 


Fig.  88.    Choir  of  the  Cathedral,  Auxerre. 


choir ;  we  have  supposed  one  of  the  great  windows  removed,  to  show 
how  the  flying-buttresses  sustain  the  vault  and  how  the  interior 


CONSTRUCTION. 


205 


buttress  is  cut  through  at  the  height  of  the  triforium  and  of  the 
gallery  above. 

At  A  we  perceive  the  cradle-arch  fixed  between  the  wall-arches 
and  the  archivolts  of  the  windows  ;  but,  by  a  concession  to  the  Bur- 
gundian  system,  this  cradle-vault  does  not  start  as,  in  Champagne, 
from  the  capitals  B,  but  a  little  higher  up  from  a  lintel  C,  placed 
upon  the  sides  of  the  interior  buttress. 

This  cradle-vault  is  here  fixed  upon  the  extrados  of  the  wall-arch, 
but  it  is  independent ;  while,  in  the  system  of  Champagne,  the 
cradle-vault  and  the  wall-arch  are  one,  or,  rather,  the  cradle-vault  is 
simply  a  very  broad  wall-arch.  The  tracery  of  the  windows  is 
built  in  courses  and  not  composed  of  columns  and  of  bars  set 
against  the  stratum.  We  give  at  D  the  horizontal  section  of  the 
high  pier  at  the  level  E ;  and  at  F,  the  section  of  the  pier  at  the 
level  G,  of  the  triforium. 

Following  the  Burgundian  plan,  these  piers  are  set  against  the 
stratum  for  their  entire  height. 

The  cornice  and  water-channel  above  do  not  rest  then  upon  a  flag- 
ging, as  in  the  aisles  and  in  the  chapel  of  the  Virgin,  of  the  same 
edifice,  but  upon  the  arches  A. 

The  trusses  of  the  roof  are  laid  upon  the  wall-arches. 

The  gutter  above  throws  its  waters  upon  the  copings  of  the  open- 
work that  surmounts,  weights  and  consolidates  the  flying-buttresses. 
These  copings  have  enough  resistance  and  thickness  and  are  firmly 
enough  sustained  by  the  open-work,  whose  upright  positions  are 
close  together,  so  as  to  form  an  actual  prop  of  stone  opposing  its 
rigidity  to  the  thrust  of  the  vault. 

Figure  89  gives  the  exterior  view  of  one  of  these  flying-buttresses, 
very  well  built  and  well  protected  by  the  projections  of  the  copings. 

Let  us  leave,  for  a  moment,  the  provinces  of  Champagne  and  Bur- 
gundy to  examine  how,  during  the  same  time  (that  is,  from  1200  to 
1250),  the  Gothic  methods  of  construction  had  progressed  in  the 
French  provinces  Ile-de-France,  Picardy  and  Beauvoisis. 


206    DEVELOPMENTS    {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 

One  of  the  qualities  peculiar  to  Gothic  architecture  (and,  perhaps, 
its  most  striking  one)  is  that  one  cannot  study  its  form,  appearance 

or  decoration  independently 
of  its  structure.1 

One  can  deceive  with  the 
Roman  architecture,  because 
its  decoration  is  only  a  gar- 
ment, not  always  perfectly 
adapted  to  the  object  that  it 
covers ;  but  we  cannot  deceive 
with  the  Gothic  architecture, 
for  that  architecture  is,  before 
all  things,  a  construction. 

It  is  chiefly  in  the  edifices 
of  Ile-de-France  that  we  can 
show  the  application  of  this 
principle. 

We  have  seen  that  in  Bur- 
gundy, thanks  to  the  excellent 
quality  of  the  materials  and  to 
the  possibility  of  extracting 
them  in  large  pieces,  the 
builders  have  been  able  to 
permit  themselves  a  certain 

Fig.  89.    Flying-buttress,  from  the  Cathedral,    hardihood,   which    may  pass 

Auxerre. 

for  a  feat  of  strength. 
This  fault  could  not  be  charged  against  the  builders  of  Ile-de- 
France  or  their  school.    They  are  wise :  they  know  how  to  keep 

1  We  have  often  been  called  upon  to  defend  the  projects  for  restoring  Gothic 
monuments,  to  give  a  reason  for  the  expenditures,  necessary  and  considerable, 
in  order  to  save  them  from  ruin.  In  the  very  natural  hope  of  securing  economy, 
people  have  often  repeated  :  "  Do  only  what  is  strictly  necessary  and  leave  to 
better  times  the  work  of  finishing,  carving  and  polishing,  etc."  The  reply  was 
difficult,  for  it  would  have  been  necessary  to  enforce  a  whole  course  of  Gothic 
architecture  upon  the  people  who  were  giving  us  these  suggestions  to  make  them 
understand  that  in  Gothic  edifices  everything  has  to  be  put  together,  that  the 


CONSTRUCTION. 


207 


within  the  limits  imposed  by  matter  and,  even  when  Gothic  archi- 
tecture plunges  into  exaggeration  of  its  own  principles,  they  still  pre- 
serve, relatively,  that  moderation  which  is  the  stamp  of  men  of  taste. 

The  valleys  of  the  Seine  and  the  Oise  have  excellent  beds  of  lime- 
stone, but  of  a  slight  thickness  when  the  materials  are  hard  and  of 
great  thickness  when  they  are  soft;  that  is,  at  least,  the  general  law. 
The  structures  raised  in  these  valleys  obey  this  law. 

All  the  front  part  of  the  cathedral  at  Paris  was  erected  during 
the  first  years  of  the  thirteenth  century ;  as  a  construction,  it  is  an 
irreproachable  work.  All  the  members  of  the  immense  western 
facade,  on  a  scale  superior  to  everything  else  that  was  built  at  that 
period,  are  exactly  regulated  by  the  dimensions  of  the  materials 
employed.  It  is  the  height  of  the  ledges  of  stone  that  has  deter- 
mined the  height  of  all  the  parts  of  the  structure. 

Up  to  this  time,  in  treating  of  the  early  constructions  of  the 
Gothic  period,  we  have  cited  only  edifices  of  moderate  dimensions ; 
now,  the  processes  which  may  be  sufficient  when  it  is  necessary  to 
build  a  small  edifice  are  not  applicable  when  it  is  necessary  to  raise 
enormous  masses  of  materials  to  a  great  height. 

The  lay  architects  of  the  thirteenth  century,  consummate  workers, 
thoroughly  understood  this  law,  fallen  to-day  into  oblivion,  despite 
our  scientific  progress  and  our  theoretical  knowledge  of  the  strength 
and  the  resistance  of  materials  suitable  for  building. 

The  Greeks  raised  only  small  monuments,  in  comparison  with 
those  of  the  Roman  period,  or  if,  by  exception,  they  wished  to  sur- 
pass the  usual  scale,  it  must  be  admitted  that  they  have  not  subor- 
dinated the  forms  to  this  change  of  dimension.  Thus,  for  instance, 
the  large  basilica  at  Agrigentum,  known  under  the  name  of  the 

stone  is  laid  when  carved  and  polished  and  that,  to  speak  accurately,  one  can- 
not build  a  Gothic  monument  while  leaving  anything  to  be  done  by  those  who 
are  to  come  after  us.  From  the  point-of-view  of  art,  is  this  a  defect?  Is  it  not, 
on  the  contrary,  the  highest  praise  that  could  be  given  to  architecture  to  say, 
after  having  proved  it,  that  all  Avhich  constitutes  it  is  so  intimately  connected 
that  its  ornamentation  is  so  truly  part  of  its  structure  that  one  cannot  be  sepa- 
rated from  the  other  ? 


208    DEVELOPMENTS  {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 


Temple  of  the  Giants,  reproduces  in  colossal  size  the  forms  adopted 
in  much  smaller  temples ;  the  engaged  capitals  of  that  edifice  are 
composed  of  two  blocks  of  stone  put  together.  To  make  an  engaged 
capital  by  joining  two  stones  set  side  by  side,  so  that  there  is  a  joint 
in  the  axis  of  this  capital,  is  an  atrocity  in  principle.  In  the  same 
monument,  the  colossi,  who  were  probably  set  with  their  backs  to 
the  piers  and  formed  the  second  inner  row,  are  carved  out  of 
courses  of  stone  so  thin  that  their  heads  contain  three  pieces. 

To  make  a  statue,  a  caryatid,  even  if  it  be  colossal,  out  of  courses 
set  one  upon  another,  is  likewise  an  atrocity  for  a  true  constructor. 

The  joints  were  hidden  under  a  painted  stucco  which  disguised 
the  poverty  of  the  work,  very  true  ;  from  our  point  of  view,  putting 
ourselves  in  the  place  of  the  Gothic  builders,  the  ignorance  of  the 
principle  is  none  the  less  evident. 

But  one  must  judge  the  arts  by  applying  to  them  their  own  princi- 
ples not  the  principles  belonging  to  different  arts.  We  are  not 
bringing  an  accusation  here  against  Grecian  architecture ;  only  we 
state  a  fact  and  ask  that  people  will  judge  Gothic  architecture  by 
taking  its  own  elements,  its  code  and  not  by  applying  to  it  laws  never 
made  for  it. 

The  Romans  have  only  one  way  of  building,  applicable  to  all  their 
edifices,  whatever  be  their  dimensions :  our  readers  already  know  that 
the  Romans  mould  their  edifices  upon  a  form,  or  in  a  form  and  cover 
them  with  an  envelope  purely  ornamental,  which  neither  adds  to 
nor  detracts  from  the  solidity.  That  is  excellent,  that  is  reasonable  ; 
but  it  has  nothing  to  do  with  Gothic  construction,  whose  appear- 
ance is  only  the  result  of  the  structure.1 

Let  us  return  to  our  point  of  departure.  We  were  saying  that  the 
Gothic  architects  of  the  thirteenth  century  governed  their  mode  of 
construction  by  the  dimensions  of  the  edifices  that  they  wished  to 

1  We  shall  perhaps  be  accused  of  repeating  ourselves  in  the  course  of  this  work  ; 
but  the  prejudices  against  which  we  must  contend  are  only  the  result  of  error,  or 
of  false  valuations  repeated  with  rare  persistence.  In  such  a  case,  truth,  in 
order  to  show  its  claims,  has  no  choice  but  to  use  the  same  tactics. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


209 


erect.  There  is  a  law  so  simple  that  the  whole  world  may  under- 
stand it,  without  having  the  least  idea  of  statics,  namely,  that  given 
building  stones  having  a  surface  40  centimetres  high,  for  instance,  if 
we  raise  a  pier  3.20  metres  high  with  these  stones,  we  shall  have 
nine  horizontal  beds  in  the  height  of  the  pier;  but  if  with  the  same 
materials  we  raise  a  pier  6.40  metres  high,  we  shall  have  seventeen 
beds. 

If  each  bed  undergoes  a  depression  of  1  millimetre,  for  the  smaller 
pier  the  settling  will  be  9  millimetres  and  for  the  larger  pier  17 
millimetres. 

We  must  still  add,  to  the  depression  resulting  from  the  number  of 
beds,  the  greater  weight  which  adds  a  new  cause  of  settling  in  case 
of  the  large  pier. 

Accordingly,  the  more  stones  the  builder  piles  one  upon  another, 
the  more  he  increases  the  chances  of  settling,  because  of  fractures 
or  instability  in  the  various  members  of  his  edifice,  since,  if  his  edi- 
fice increases  in  size,  the  materials  are  the  same.  These  differences 
are  not  perceptible  between  edifices  that  differ  little  in  their  dimen- 
sions, or  when  one  consents  to  put  an  enormous  excess  of  resistance 
into  the  constructions;  but  if  one  is  unwilling  to  put  into  the  work 
more  than  the  exact  quantity  of  materials  needed  and  if,  with  the 
same  materials,  he  desires  to  build  a  facade  like  that  of  a  village 
church  and  one  like  that  of  Notre  Dame  at  Paris,  he  will  see  the 
need  of  adopting  special  arrangements  in  the  large  edifice  in  order 
to  ward  off  the  singularly  increased  chances  of  settling,  ruptures  and 
consequent  general  dislocation. 

We  have  already  seen  how  the  early  Gothic  builders  had  found  a 
resource  against  settling  and  deformations,  resulting  in  the  use  of 
stones  set  upright,  against  the  stratum,  to  strengthen  the  higher 
piers  built  in  courses. 

We  have  also  shown  how,  during  the  Romanesque  period,  the 
builders  had  enclosed  a  mass  of  rough  stones  between  walls  that 
kept  on   the  outside   the   appearance  of   a   structure   in  large 


210    DEVELOPMENTS  {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 


facing-stones.  The  Gothic  architects,  having  been  able  to  show  the 
insufficiency  of  that  process  and  its  lack  of  cohesion,  substituted 
masonry  of  small  facing-stones  and  tried  to  give  it  resistance  and 
especially  rigidity  by  placing  beside  it  large  pieces  of  stone,  detached 
and  only  connected  from  point  to  point,  with  the  body  of  the  struct- 
ure, by  courses  set  upon  their  bed  and  penetrating  deep  into  that 
structure.  With  stones  set  against  the  stratum  they  made  columns 
and  with  the  connecting  courses,  bases,  rings,  capitals,  friezes  and 
bands.  That  is  the  origin  of  those  arcades  of  the  basement,  those 
arrangements  of  pillars,  set  against  the  facings  and  often  even  of  the 
open-work  which  decorates  the  tops  of  the  exterior  buttresses  or  of 
the  walls. 

The  facade  of  the  cathedral  at  Paris  furnishes  us  with  fine  ex- 
amples of  that  mixed  construction,  composed  of  courses  and  of  stone 
inlaid  against  the  stratum,  whose  function  is  so  plainly  evident  and 
which  present  such  brilliant  inducements  for  decoration.  One  must, 
it  is  true,  have  been  called  upon  to  analyze  these  constructions,  in 
order  to  recognize  their  practical  meaning  ;  nothing  is  simpler  in  ap- 
pearance, as  a  structure,  than  the  enormous  facade  of  Notre  Dame 
at  Paris  and  this  is  one  of  its  excellences.  In  seeing  such  a  mass, 
one  does  not  suppose  that  it  is  necessary  to  employ  certain  artifices, 
studied  contrivances  for  giving  it  perfect  stability.  It  seems  enough 
to  have  piled  up  courses  of  stone  from  the  base  to  the  summit  and 
as  if  that  enormous  mass  ought  to  maintain  itself  with  its  own 
weight.  But,  we  repeat,  to  build  a  facade  20  metres  high  and  to 
build  one  69  metres  high  are  two  different  operations  ;  and  the 
facade  of  20  metres,  perfectly  solid  and  well  combined,  might  not,  if 
its  dimensions  were  tripled  in  every  way,  be  able  to  stand  upright. 
These  are  laws  which  practice  alone  can  teach.  There  is  no  need  of 
making  intricate  calculations  to  understand,  for  example,  that  a  pier 
whose  square  horizontal  section  gives  1  metre  of  surface  and  whose 
height  is  10  metres,  gives  10  cubic  metres  resting  on  a  surface  1 
metre  square ;  that  if  we  doubled  the  height  of  the  pier  and  likewise 


CONSTRUCTION. 


211 


its  width  and  thickness,  although  the  ratios  between  its  height 
and  its  base  are  similar  to  those  of  the  first  pier,  we  obtain  a  surface 
2  metres  square  (or  containing  4  square  metres)  and  a  solid  of  80 
cubic  metres. 

In  the  first  case,  the  ratio  of  the  surface  to  the  solid  is  as  1  to  10 ; 
in  the  second,  as  1  to  20.  The  ratios  of  the  weights  to  the  surfaces 
are  hence  augmented  in  a  proportion  increasing  as  the  scale  of  the 
edifice  is  augmented.1 

This  first  elementary  rule  being  established,  there  is  presented  in 
the  construction  of  very  large  edifices  a  difficulty  which  will  again 
augment  the  effect  of  the  weights  produced  by  the  increase  in  volume. 

If  the  materials  do  not  go  beyond  a  certain  height,  their  dimen- 
sions in  length  and  width  are  equally  limited ;  and  it  results  that,  if 
we  can  raise,  for  instance,  a  pier  having  a  metre  of  surface  in  its 
horizontal  section,  by  means  of  courses  made  each  of  one  block  of 
stone,  it  will  not  be  the  same  when  the  pier  has  4  square  metres  in 
its  horizontal  section,  for  we  cannot  procure  courses  of  that  size. 
Hence,  in  enlarging  the  scale  of  an  edifice,  on  one  hand,  we  change 
the  ratios  between  the  solids  or  weights  and  the  surfaces ;  and,  on 
the  other  hand,  we  cannot  obtain  such  complete  homogeneity  in  the 
constituent  parts.  This  is  a  new  cause  for  rupture  —  for  dislocation. 
To  avoid  the  danger  arising  from  too  great  a  weight  resting  upon  too 
small  a  surface,  we  are  naturally  led  to  enlarge  that  surface  at  the 
base,  being  at  liberty  to  diminish  it  in  proportion  as  the  structure 
rises  and  as  the  weights  consequently  become  less. 

The  type  most  nearly  approaching  this  principle  is  a  pyramid  ; 

but  a  pyramid  is  a  heap  of  stones,  not  a  construction. 

1  Now,  we  have  sometimes  met  architects  who  were  greatly  surprised  to  see  the 
piers  of  their  churches  breaking  down  under  the  weight  and  who  said:  "But 
we  followed  exactly  the  relative  proportions  of  such  an  edifice  and  used  mate- 
rials analogous  as  to  resistance.  Gothic  construction  really  presents  no  security." 
One  might  reply,  "  No  security,  it  is  true,  if  we  wish  to  enlarge  or  reduce  the 
scale  while  preserving  the  relative  proportions.  Gothic  construction  demands 
that  people  shall  take  time  to  study  it  and  learn  its  principles  and  the  Gothic 
architects  were  wicked  enough  to  invent  a  system  of  construction  which,  in  order 
to  be  applied,  must  be  studied  aud  reasoned  out." 


212    DEVELOPMENTS  (THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 

Let  us  suppose  a  tower  built  on  four  walls,  and  shown  in  cross- 
section  in  Figure  90.  We  have  given  to  the  walls  at  the  base  a 
thickness  sufficient  to  resist  the  pressure  of  the  upper  portions  and, 
as  much  to  reduce  that  pressure  as  to  keep  from  piling  up  useless 


Fig.  90.  Fig.  90&. 

materials,  we  have  gradually  reduced  the  thickness  of  these  walls, 
accordingly  as  our  structure  has  risen.  But,  plainly,  all  the  weight  A 
B  rests  upon  the  surface  C  D  and  if  the  additional  weight  D  E  F 
is  not  perfectly  united  with  it  and  does  not  form  a  whole  with  the 
load  A  B,  from  top  to  bottom,  since  the  most  important  settling 


CONSTRUCTION. 


213 


must  take  place  from  A  to  B,  fractures  will  occur,  first  at  1,  then  at 
H,  then  at  G  ;  this  increment  of  weight  D  E  F  that  we  have  added, 
will  do  more  harm  than  good  and  since  all  the  pressure  will  then 
bear  effectively  upon  the  surface  C  D,  the  inner  facing  of  the  wall 
will  give  way.  If  our  tower  is  not  very  high,  it  will  be  easy  for  us 
to  fasten  together  perfectly,  by  means  of  long  stones,  the  outer  facings 
to  those  within,  to  make  a  homogeneous  structure  and  hence  it  will 
be  really  the  base  C  E,  which  will  carry  all  the  weight ;  but  if  our 
tower  is  very  high,  if  its  size  is  colossal,  whatever  precautions  we  may 
take,  since  the  structure  must  consist  of  a  considerable  quantity  of 
stones,  we  shall  never  be  able  to  fasten  the  two  facings  together 
firmly  enough  to  resist  that  difference  of  pressure  exerted  on  the 
interior  and  exterior ;  our  masonry  will  come  apart  and  the  effects 
just  noted  will  be  produced.  We  must  hence  use  some  artifice.  We 
must  bring  it  to  pass  that  the  outer  facing,  less  heavily  weighted, 
shall  present  a  rigidity  greater  than  that  of  the  inner  facing  and  that 
at  the  height  of  each  point  of  retreat  there  shall  be  a  very  strong 
connection  with  the  body  of  the  structure. 

In  other  terms,  the  outer  facing  must  prop  the  body  of  the  ma- 
sonry and  produce  the  effect  seen  in  Figure  90S. 

Now,  this  is  not  easy  when  we  have  only  stones  nearly  all  of  the 
same  size.  Still,  the  architect  of  the  facade  of  the  cathedral  at  Paris 
has  reached  this  result  by  a  very  scientific  and  well  planned  arrange- 
ment of  his  structure.  He  has  begun  by  establishing  each  tower, 
not  upon  filled  walls,  but  upon  piers  (see  plan  of  the  cathedral  of 
Paris  under  the  word  "Cathedrale  "),  for  it  is  easier  to  give  homo- 
geneity to  the  structure  of  a  pier  than  to  that  of  a  wall. 

These  exterior  and  interior  piers  are  built  in  courses  of  hard  stone, 
regular,  carefully  levelled,  enclosing  an  excellent  mass  and  consist- 
ing of  large  stones  sunk  in  thick  mortar. 

The  interior  pier  is  buttressed  in  every  direction,  since  it  is  in- 
terior and  it  carries  a  vertical  weight;  but  the  exterior  piers, 
whether  at  the  front  or  the  sides,  have  had  to  be  supported  by  a 


214   DEVELOPMENTS  {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 


strong  base.  Now,  the  whole  structure  is  well  faced  in  long  stones, 
within  and  without  and  from  the  basement  to  the  shaft  of  the  towers 
the  supports  are  built  as  indicated  in  Figure  91. 

The  result  of  the  method  employed  is  that,  although  a  much 
stronger  pressure  is  exerted  upon  the  inner  facing  (whose  intersec- 
tion with  the  projecting  jambs  of  the  bays  at  different  heights  is 
shown  by  the  dotted  line  A  B)  than  upon  the  exterior  facings  of  the 
piers  and  although,  because  of  this  pressure,  a  perceptible  settling 
can  be  seen  in  the  interior,  nevertheless,  since  all  the  weights  are 
transmitted,  by  the  arrangement  of  the  blocks  of  stone  sunk  in  the 
thickness  of  the  filling  and  fastened  by  cramp-irons  at  different 
heights,  upon  the  outer  facing  and  since  they  form,  as  indicated 
in  Figure  91&,  a  series  of  angles  like  the  teeth  of  a  saw,  the 
weight  C  D  rests  upon  the  base  E  F,  the  weight  E  G  rests  upon 
the  base  /  K,  the  weight  /  L,  upon  the  whole  base  M  N  and  thus 
down  to  the  base  of  the  pier. 

But  since,  in  fact,  the  depression  must  take  place  between  the 
points  E  G,  I  L,  M  0  and  P  R,  it  results  that  the  projections  G  F, 
L  K,  ON,  R  S,  rest  their  angles  F,  Ky  N,  S,  very  heavily  upon 
the  outer  facing  V,  and  since  this  undergoes  less  depression  than  the 
inner  facing,  being  less  heavily  weighted,  it  fills  the  office  of  the 
prop  that  we  indicated  in  Figure  905. 

To-day  when  we  no  longer  build  these  colossal  structures,  consist- 
ing of  widely  varying  parts,  we  do  not  suspect  the  effects  manifested 
under  such  circumstances  and  we  are  very  much  astonished  when 
we  see  them  taking  place  and  causing  the  most  serious  disorders. 
It  is  easy  to  reason  theoretically  about  these  enormous  weights 
unequally  distributed ;  but  in  practice,  through  lack  of  precaution  in 
details  and  through  abandoning  the  execution  to  the  methods  of 
habit,  we  are  reduced  very  frequently  to  acknowledge  our  weakness, 
to  blame  the  art  that  we  profess,  the  soil  on  which  we  build,  the 
materials,  the  contractors,  everything  and  everybody  except  the 
perfect  ignorance  in  which  we  have  been  left,  under  pretext  of  keep- 


CONSTRUCTION. 


216    DEVELOPMENTS    {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 


ing  up  the  classic  traditions.  We  admit  freely  that  the  architecture 
of  the  Romans  was  superior  to  Gothic  architecture,  so  much  the 
more  freely  since,  to  us  the  architecture  of  the  Greeks,  of  the 
Romans,  or  of  the  western  nations  of  the  Middle  Ages,  is  good  from 
the  moment  that  it  remains  faithful  to  the  principles  admitted  by  each 
one  of  these  three  civilizations ;  we  will  not  dispute  about  a  matter 
of  taste. 

But  if  we  wish  to  erect  monuments  like  those  of  ancient  Rome,  we 
must  build  as  the  Romans  built ;  have  space,  slaves,  a  powerful  will ; 
be  the  masters  of  the  world,  impress  men  and  take  materials  where- 
ever  it  shall  seem  good  to  us.  .  .  .  Louis  XIV  played  the  part  of  a 
Roman  constructor  seriously,  even  to  sometimes  pretending  to  build 
like  a  Roman.  He  commenced  the  aqueduct  of  Maintenon  like  a 
true  emperor  of  the  ancient  city;  he  commenced,  without  being  able 
to  finish.  Money,  workmen  and  more  than  all  that,  the  imperious 
need,  were  wanting.  In  our  great  railroad  constructions  we  also 
approach  the  Romans  and  this  is  the  best  that  we  can  do  ;  but  as  to 
our  domestic  constructions,  the  monuments  or  the  dwellings  in  our 
cities,  when  we  pretend  to  ape  the  Romans,  we  are  only  ridiculous 
and  we  should  act  more  wisely,  it  seems  to  us,  in  profiting  by  the 
elements  used  among  us  with  reason  and  success  by  generations  of 
artists,  who  have  admitted  principles  agreeing  with  our  needs,  our 
means,  our  materials  and  the  modern  spirit. 

We  have  now  said  enough  about  the  construction  of  the  Middle 
Ages  to  make  clear  wherein  its  principle  differs  entirely  from  the 
Roman  principle  of  construction,  how  the  processes  that  suit  the  one 
do  not  suit  the  other  and  how  the  two  methods  are  the  result  of  oppo- 
site civilizations,  ideas  and  systems. 

Having  admitted  the  principle  of  equilibrium,  of  active  forces 
opposed  one  to  another  to  produce  stability,  the  builders  of  the 
Middle  Ages,  because  of  the  natural  tendency  of  man  toward  abuse 
in  everything,  could  not  but  end  by  exaggerating,  in  the  successive 
applications  of  these  principles,  whatever  they  might  have  that  was 


CONSTRUCTION. 


217 


good,  rational,  or  ingenious.  Still,  we  repeat,  the  abuse  is  felt  less 
in  the  provinces  of  the  Royal  domain  and  particularly  in  Ile-de- 
France,  than  in  the  other  countries  where  the  Gothic  system  had 
penetrated. 

It  is  easily  seen  that  so  early  as  the  middle  of  the  thirteenth  cen- 
tury the  builders  were  perfectly  at,  ease  among  these  problems  of 
equilibrium  so  difficult  to  solve  in  edifices  of  very  great  size  and 
often  of  very  frail  materials. 

In  the  North  they  built  only  in  stone,  but  they  employed  at  the 
same  time  and  in  the  same  edifice  facing  stones  in  courses  set  upon 
their  natural  bed,  the  large  stones  sunk  in  mortar,  an  easily  compres- 
sible mass  and  the  blocks  set  against  the  stratum,  rigid,  inflexible 
props,  that  might  in  certain  cases  be  of  great  assistance.  Elasticity 
being  the  first  of  all  the  necessary  conditions  in  monuments  erected 
on  slender  supports,  it  was  still  necessary  to  find,  besides  that 
elasticity,  absolute  rigidity  and  resistance.  It  is  through  lack  of  the 
power  or  the  will  to  apply  this  principle,  in  all  its  exactness,  that 
"the  Cathedral  of  Beauvais  could  not  be  maintained.  There,  elas- 
ticity is  everything.  That  monument  may  be  compared  to  a  wicker 
cage.  .  .  .  But  we  shall  return  to  it  later,  for  its  faults  are  an  excel- 
lent lesson.  .  .  .  Let  us  not  leave  so  soon  our  Cathedral  of  Paris. 
The  section  of  one  of  the  buttresses  of  the  towers  shows  us  clearly 
that  the  builders  at  the  beginning  of  the  thirteenth  century  did  not 
pile  the  stones  one  upon  another  without  purpose  and  without 
noticing  the  effects  which  were  produced  in  large  edifices,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  laws  of  weight.  Their  masonry  lives,  acts,  fulfils  a 
function,  is  never  an  inert  and  passive  mass.  To-day  we  build  our 
edifices  somewhat  as  a  sculptor  makes  a  statue :  provided  the  human 
form  is  passably  observed,  it  is  enough  ;  but  it  is  none  the  less  an 
unorganized  block. 

The  Gothic  building  has  its  organs  and  its  laws  of  equilibrium 
and  each  of  its  members  cooperates  with  the  whole  by  an  action  or 
a  resistance.    Every  one  cannot  see  the  interior  of  the  buttresses  of 


218    DEVELOPMENTS  {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 

the  towers  of  Notre  Dame  at  Paris  and  we  foresee  an  objection  that 
has  often  been  addressed  to  us,  namely,  that  our  imagination  has  led 


Fig.  92.    Double  Aisles  of  Nave,  Cathedral  of  Notre  Dame,  Paris. 

us  to  attribute  to  these  artists  of  past  centuries  intentions  that  they 
never  had.   So  let  us  take  for  the  benefit  of  these  doubting  spirits  an 


CONSTRUCTION. 


219 


instance  that  they  can  easily  verify  in  this  same  monument.  The 
great  vaults  of  the  nave  in  the  Cathedral  of  Paris  are  composed,  as 
every  one  can  see,  of  diagonal  arches  including  two  compartments 
and  intersected  by  a  transverse  arch  ;  it  is  the  early  system  of  Gothic 
vaults  explained  in  detail  in  this  article. 

The  result  of  this  arrangement  is  that  the  piers  of  the  great  nave 
are  unequally  loaded,  since  they  receive,  alternately,  either  a  trans- 
verse arch  alone,  or  a  tranverse  and  two  diagonal  arches;  and  yet 
the  piers  of  the  great  nave  are  all  of  equal  diameter.  This  is  some- 
thing of  a  shock  to  the  reason,  especially  in  a  very  large  edifice  since 
these  unequal  weights  ought  to  produce  unequal  degrees  of  settling 
and  since,  if  the  piers  supporting  three  arches  are  strong  enough, 
those  supporting  only  one  are  too  strong;  but  if,  on  the  contrary, 
those  supporting  only  one  arch  are  of  a  suitable  diameter,  those 
which  support  three  are  too  slender.  Apparently  there  is  no  answer 
to  be  made  to  this  criticism  and  we  must  admit  that  it  took  us  a 
long  time  to  explain  such  apparent  disregard  of  the  simplest  princi- 
ples among  artists  who  always  proceed  by  reasoning. 

Nevertheless,  this  is  a  proof  that  we  must  never  be  hasty  in  pass- 
ing judgment  on  an  art  that  we  are  scarcely  beginning  to  decipher. 
Let  us  enter  the  aisles  of  the  cathedral,  double  in  the  nave  as  about 
the  choir ;  but  let  us  remark  in  passing,  that  this  nave  was  built  fif- 
teen or  twenty  years  after  the  choir  and  that  the  architects  at  the 
beginning  of  the  thirteenth  century,  who  built  it,  profited  by  mistakes 
made  by  their  predecessor. 

We  notice  that  the  piers  which  separate  the  double  aisles  of  the 
nave  are  not  all  alike.  We  see  alternately  a  monocylindrical  column 
consisting  of  courses  (drums)  of  stone  and  a  central  column  also  con- 
sisting of  courses,  but  flanked  by  twelve  small  columns,  each  in  one 
piece  and  set  against  the  stratum.    (See  plan,  Fig.  92.) 

Why  this  difference  in  construction  ?  ...  Is  it  caprice  —  a  whim  ? 

But  however  little  one  may  have  studied  these  monuments,  he 
remains  convinced  that  caprice  has  no  share  in  the  plans  of  the 


220    DEVELOPMENTS  {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 


builders  of  that  period,  especially  in  case  of  such  an  important 
member  in  architecture  as  a  pier.1 

The  question,  "Why  that  difference?"  being  put,  we  shall  with 
some  care  soon  solve  it. 

These  intermediate  piers  A ,  surrounded  by  pillars  set  against  the 
stratum,  are  coupled  with  the  pillars  of  the  great  nave,  which 
support  the  heaviest  weight,  namely,  one  transverse  and  two  diagonal 
arches.  Now,  we  must  know  that  originally  the  flying-buttresses  of 
the  nave  were  not  those  which  we  see  to-day  and  which  date  only 
from  the  second  half  of  the  thirteenth  century.  These  original  but- 
tresses were  in  double  flight ;  that  is,  they  first  rested  on  an  inter- 
mediate pillar  placed  upon  the  piers  A  and  B  of  the  double  aisle 
and  then  were  buttressed  in  their  turn  by  secondary  flying-but- 
tresses clearing  the  spaces  A  C  and  B  D.  (See  the  word  "  Cathe- 
drale,"  Fig.  2,  giving  the  sections  of  the  nave  of  Notre  Dame  at 
Paris). 

Certainly  the  flying-buttresses  destined  to  balance  the  transverse 
and  diagonal  arches  of  the  great  vaults  were  stronger  than  those 
destined  only  to  balance  a  simple  transverse  arch  scarcely  weighted. 
Perhaps  even  the  intermediate  transverse  arch  of  the  great  vaults 
was  not  balanced  by  a  flying-buttress,  which  would  not  have  hin- 
dered the  vaults  from  keeping  their  curvature,  since,  in  the  two 
transepts,  we  still  see  simple  transverse  arches  thus  left  to  them- 
selves without  undergoing  deformation.  The  previous  explanations 
contained  in  this  article  have  shown  that  the  vertical  pier  carrying 
the  vaults  plays  only  a  subordinate  part  and  that  a  great  part  of  the 
weight  of  the  vaults,  being  drawn  off  by  the  flying-buttresses,  rests 
upon  the  abutment  of  these  flying-buttresses. 

Hence  it  was  reasonable  to  give  to  the  pillars  destined  to  carry 
the  piers  on  which  rested  the  flying-buttresses,  or  at  least  the  more 

1  Caprice  is  an  explanation  admitted  in  many  cases,  when  one  speaks  of  Gothic 
architecture ;  it  has  the  advantage  of  reassuring  the  consciences  of  those  who 
would  rather  cut  through  a  difficult  question  with  one  word  than  try  to  solve  it. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


221 


powerful  flying-buttresses,  a  greater  resistance.  But  had  the  archi- 
tect given  greater  diameter  to  the  piers  A  than  to  the  piers  B  (Fig. 
92),  these  pillars  A  would  still  have  been  compressed  by  the  very 
heavy  weight  that  they  had  to  support  and  their  settling  would  have 
occasioned  very  serious  disorders  in  the  higher  structure,  the  rup- 
ture of  the  flying-buttresses  and  hence 
the  deformation  of  the  great  vaults. 
Still,  the  architect  did  not  wish  to 
give  to  these  pillars  A  such  a  thick- 
ness as  to  render  difficult  the  building 
of  the  vaults  of  the  aisles  and  to  pro- 
duce an  unfortunate  effect;  so  he  has, 
as  usual,  employed  an  artifice  ;  he  has 
surrounded  his  cylindrical  piers,  built 
in  courses,  by  strong  columns  set 
against  the  cleavage — twelve  re- 
sisting, incompressible  supports  (Fig. 
93),  with  the  certainty  that  this 
system  of  building  could  undergo 
neither  settling  nor  deformation  and 
that  consequently  very  strong  flying- 
buttresses,  resting  upon  these  piers, 
could  undergo  no  displacement.  This 
arrangement  had  also  the  advantage 
of  leaving  above  the  capitals,  between 
the  transverse  and  diagonal  arches,  a 
strong  course  E,  resting  directly  upon 

Fig.  93.    Aisle  Pillar,   Notre  Dame,   the  Central  Column  A  (FiS'  92)«  . 

Pans'  The  method  of  laying  the  materials 

(stones)  either  upon  their  natural  bed,  or  perpendicularly  to  it,  was 
rapidly  improved  during  the  first  half  of  the  thirteenth  century.  In 
this,  there  was,  in  fact,  a  means  to  which  we,  who  claim  to  have 
invented  everything,  resort  every  day,  since  we  use  cast-iron  in  our 


222    DEVELOPMENTS  {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 
constructions  with  much  less  intelligence,  we  repeat,  than  that  shown 


Fig.  94.    Vaulting  in  Chancel,  Notre  Dame,  Amiens. 

by  the  Gothic  builders  when  they  sought  to  obtain  incompressible 
and  rigid  supports  by  the  use  of  certain  stones  of  excellent  quality. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


223 


Let  us  see  other  applications  of  these  principles  still  better  reasoned 
out. 

The  choir  of  the  Cathedral  at  Amiens,  built  some  years  before 
that  at  Beauvais,  is,  from  the  point  of  view  of  Gothic  construction,  a 
masterpiece,  particularly  in  the  lower  parts.1 

Let  us  first  examine  the  piers  of  the  chancel  of  Notre  Dame  at 
Amiens.  These  piers  give,  in  their  plan,  a  large  cylindrical  column 
120  centimetres  in  diameter,  flanked  by  four  columns,  three  of  which 
are  45  centimetres  in  diameter  and  one  35  centimetres.  These  four 
columns  are  built  only  one-fourth  part  into  the  central  cylinder. 
The  abaci  of  the  capitals  are  made  to  receive  exactly  the  arches  of 
the  vaults,  as  appears  in  Figure  94,  and  the  contours  of  these  arches 
are  themselves  shaped  with  reference  to  their  functions. 

The  archivolts  A  consist  of  a  double  row  of  voussoirs  and  sup- 
port the  wall. 

The  transverse  arches  B  of  the  aisles,  which  sustain  only  the  vault 
and  prop  the  structure,  have  a  more  slender  contour  and  their  whole 
resistance  is  upward,  like  a  groin  or  a  rib. 

The  diagonal  arches  C  are  shaped  after  the  same  principle,  but 
narrower  than  the  transverse  arches,  their  burden  being  lighter  and 
their  function  less  important.  A  single  stone  of  impost,  the  first  one 
D,  has  its  upper  bed  horizontal ;  above  this  stone  each  arch  detaches 
itself  and  is  formed  of  independent  voussoirs. 

It  will  be  observed  that  the  triangles  E,  filling  the  vaults,  rise 
vertically  to  the  point  where  their  meeting  with  the  extrados  of  the 
second  arch  F,  serving  as  wall-arch,  permits  them  to  follow  its 
curve. 

If  we  suppose  a  horizontal  section  of  this  structure  at  the  level  P, 
we  obtain  Figure  95,  on  which  we  have  traced  with  white  and  dotted 
lines  the  alternate  arrangement  of  the  courses. 

At  S  is  a  structure,  solidly  built,  not  of  rough  stones,  but  by 

1  See  the  word  "  Catlddrale  "  for  the  historical  outline  of  the  structure  of  Notre 
Dame  at  Amiens.  The  upper  parts  of  the  choir  could  be  finished  only  with 
insufficient  resources. 


224    DEVELOPMENTS  {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 

means  of  courses  piled  up  to  form  a  support  and  to  balance  the  pier 
supporting  the  upper  gallery. 

If  we  cut  the  pier  vertically  through  its  axis  M  N,  we  shall  have 
the  section  (Fig.  96). 

A  is  the  level  of  the  capitals  at  the  beginning  of  the  vaults  of  the 


M 
I 


Fig.  95. 

aisle ;  B,  the  impost  of  these  vaults  with  its  temporary  tie-rod  R, 
placed  there  only  during  building  in  order  to  keep  the  piers  in  posi- 
tion and  check  the  lateral  thrust  of  the  arches  until  these  piers  are 
weighted  [see  "  Chahiage "] ;    C,  the  transverse  arch,  which  is 


CONSTRUCTION. 


225 


Figs.  96  and  97.    From  the  Chancel  of  Notre  Dame,  Amiens. 


226   DEVELOPMENTS    {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 

free  ;  D,  the  courses  projecting  in  corbel  to  receive  the  buttress  E  of 
the  gallery  above  the  aisle. 

This  buttress,  built  of  large  pieces  of  stone  set  against  the  stratum, 
is  joined  to  the  principal  pier  I  by  an  intermediate  lintel  F. 

In  G  is  the  course  forming  a  roof  for  the  gallery,  an  upper 
passage  on  a  level  with  the  supports  of  the  high  windows  and  a 
connection  between  the  two  piers. 

At  II  is  the  detached  column,  built  like  the  buttress  of  great 
pieces  of  stone  and  consequently  rigid,  which  sustains  the  top  of  the 
flying-buttress. 

The  whole  burden  is  thus  brought  upon  the  pier  /,  first,  because 
from  that  pier  start  the  arches  of  the  vaults  and  next,  because  since 
the  pier  E,  as  well  as  the  column  H,  is  composed  of  stones  set 
against  the  stratum,  the  settling  and  the  weight  are  hence  produced 
upon  that  pier  1. 

This  weight  being  much  greater  than  that  resting  upon  the  pier 
E,  it  results  that  the  courses  D,  forming  a  corbel,  completely  destroy 
any  tendency  to  sway  or  bend,  on  the  part  of  the  buttress  E. 

The  transverse  arch  C  is  free  and  can  not  be  put  out  of  shape  by 
the  pressure  of  the  piers  E,  since  that  does  not  act  upon  its  haunches. 

This  construction  is  very  simple  :  still  it  had  to  be  discovered  ;  but 
the  following  fact  shows  the  extraordinary  sagacity  of  the  architects 
of  this  remarkable  part  of  the  Cathedral  at  Amiens. 

The  aisles  and  radiating  chapels  of  the  circular  part  of  this  edi- 
fice give,  in  horizontal  plan  above  the  bases,  Figure  9  7. 

The  flying-buttresses  that  balance  the  thrust  of  the  upper  vaults 
are  in  double  flight,  or,  in  other  words,  they  rest  upon  a  first  pier 
set  upon  the  cluster  of  columns  A  and  upon  a  second  pier  set  upon 
the  abutments  B. 

Cutting  through  C  B,  these  flying-buttresses  present  the  outline 
(Fig.  98).  This  section  shows  clearly  that  if  the  weight  bearing 
upon  the  piers  C  is  considerable,  that  bearing  upon  the  piers  A  is 
still  greater,  since  it  is  active  and  produced  not  only  by  the  weight 


CONSTRUCTION. 


227 


Fig.  98.    Chancel  Buttress,  Notre  Dame,  Amiens. 


228    DEVELOPMENTS    {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 


of  the  pier  D,  but  by  the  pressure  of  the  flying-buttress.  Every 
structure  built  in  courses  settles  down,  and  this  settling  is  the  more 
marked,  as  the  weight  is  heavier. 

Any  settling  that  takes  place  in  the  piers  C  will  not  bring  us  dan- 
ger so  long  as  the  piers  A  settle  less,  for  by  examining  Figure  98  we 
shall  see  that  the  lowering  of  the  pier  C  by  several  millimetres,  if  the 
pier  A  resists,  will  result  only  in  pressing  the  flying-buttress  harder 
against  the  haunches  of  the  high  vaults  and  in  fastening  the  whole 
structure  together  with  more  power,  by  pressing  it  towards  the  interior, 
which  cannot  be  put  out  of  shape  from  without,  since  it  is  in  the  form 
of  a  polygon  ;  but  the  pier  A  must  not  settle  as  much  as  the  pier  C. 

The  whole  resistance  of  the  structure  depends  upon  this  condition. 
Now,  the  following  is  the  manner  in  which  the  builders  have  solved 
the  problem  : 

The  piers  C  have  been  erected  in  courses  separated  by  thick 
joints  of  mortar,  according  to  the  method  of  masons  at  that  period; 
the  piers  A  are  on  the  contrary  composed  of  groups  of  columns 
built  of  large  pieces  of  stone,  a  species  of  posts  (to  borrow  a  term  in 
carpentry),  which  cannot  settle  like  a  quantity  of  courses  set  in  beds 
of  mortar. 

Not  wishing  to  give  to  these  piers  A  a  broad  impost,  in  order  not 
to  obstruct  too  much  the  entrance  to  the  chapels,  they  find  no  better 
means  to  make  them  very  rigid  under  the  weight  that  they  have  to 
support  than  to  compose  them  of  a  group  of  almost  monolithic  col- 
umns and  in  thus  diminishing  the  number  of  joints,  to  remove 
every  cause  of  settling. 

Let  us  notice  that  the  materials  at  the  disposal  of  the  architects  of 
Picardy  can  be  set  with  impunity  against  the  cleavage  and  that  if 
they  have  erected  these  columns  of  the  piers  A  in  several  pieces  it 
is  because  they  could  not  procure  monoliths  ten  metres  high ;  they 
have  taken  the  largest  stones  that  they  could  find,  varying  between 
one  and  two  metres,  while  the  piers  C  are  built  in  courses  from  fifty 
to  sixty  centimetres  high. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


229 


At  Amiens,  theory  and  practice  have  conquered  the  difficulties 
presented  by  the  building  of  a  nave  fifteen  metres  wide,  from  axis  to 
axis  of  the  piers,  by  42.50  metres  of  height  under  the  key  and  flanked 
by  aisles  seven  metres  wide  by  nineteen  metres  high  under  their  key. 

This  vast  construction  has  kept  its  position  and  the  movements 


4 


B 
E 

r  A 

£ 

K. 

S 

B 

o 

B 

K 

X 

Fig.  99. 

which  must  necessarily  have  taken  place  in  so  extensive  a  building 
have  not  been  able  to  alter  its  solidity. 

Then  architects  had  given  up  crossed  vaults  having  two  compart- 
ments ;  for,  wishing  to  distribute  the  thrusts  equally  among  the 
points  of  support,  separating  these  compartments,  they  had  adopted 
after  1220  oblong  vaults  with  diagonal  arches,  in  accordance  with 


230    DEVELOPMENTS    (THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 


the  plan  (Fig  99).  This 
was  more  logical,  for  the 
piers  A,  M,  I,  H,  were 
equal  and  the  supports  B 
all  alike  and  the  flying-but- 
tresses of  the  same  strength. 

The  builders  were  now 
coming  to  formulas :  their 
artistic  feelings  must  have 
been  shocked  by  these 
vaults  crossed  over  double 
compartments  and  appear- 
ing to  throw  their  weight 
upon  alternate  piers  and 
whose  diagonal  arches  CD, 
by  their  inclination,  had 
concealed  the  windows  cut 
from  C  to  E  under  the 
wall-arches. 

Furthermore,  as  we  have 
already  said,  these  diagonal 
arches,  having  a  diameter 
CD  very  long  in  compari- 
son with  the  diameters  of 
the  transverse  arches  C  F, 
obliged  them  to  raise  the 
keys  G  considerably ;  which 
interfered  with  the  laying  of 
the  tie-beams  of  the  trusses, 
or  necessitated  consider- 
able raising  of  the  copings 
of  the  wall-arches  C  E. 

In  building  the  vaults 
with  diagonal  arches  in 
compartments,  the  diagonal 


.A.- 

Fig.  100. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


231 


arches  A  H  being  semicircular,  it  was  easy  to  keep  the  keys  L  of 
these  diagonal  arches  from  rising  above  the  level  of  the  keys  K  of 
the  transverse  arches  A  I  and  M  H>  which  were  in  tierce-point. 

Our  readers  are  now  able,  we  believe,  to  understand  in  general, 
as  well  as  in  detail,  the  building  of  a  large  church  in  the  thirteenth 
century,  such  as,  for  example,  the  Cathedral  of  Beauvais. 

In  order  to  avoid  repetition  and  to  gather  up  the  scattered  methods 
of  which  we  have  just  been  giving  an  idea,  we  shall  follow  step  by 
step  one  of  those  great  constructions  from  the  foundation  even  to  the 
timbers  of  the  roof.  If  we  choose  the  Cathedral  of  Beauvais,  it  is 
not  because  that  edifice  is  perfect  as  to  execution,  but  because  it 
is  the  truest  and  most  absolute  embodiment  of  the  theory  of  the 
builder  at  the  middle  of  the  thirteenth  century. 

Part  of  this  edifice  fell  down  less  than  a  century  after  the  comple- 
tion of  the  choir  ;  and  yet  it  was  designed  in  such  a  way  as  to  enable 
it  to  stand  for  centuries.  This  disaster,  which  has  completely  altered 
its  character,  was  due  to  indifferent  execution,  the  lack  of  rigid  sup- 
ports, or  their  too  slight  resistance  and  especially  to  the  nature  of 
the  materials,  which  were  neither  large  nor  solid  enough.  If  the 
architect  of  the  choir  at  Beauvais  had  possessed  the  materials  of 
Burgundy,  those  used  at  Dijon  and  Semur,  for  instance,  the  excel- 
lent lime-stones  of  Chatillon-sur-Seine,  or  yet  the  stone  of  Montbard, 
of  Anstrude,  or  of  Dornecy,  or  even,  as  might  have  been  possible,  the 
stone  of  Laversine,  of  Crouy  and  of  certain  hard  ledges  in  the  val- 
leys of  the  Oise,  or  of  the  Aisne,  the  choir  of  Beauvais  would  have 
remained  standing. 

The  master-builder  at  Beauvais  was  a  man  of  genius,  who  wished 
to  reach  the  utmost  limits  possible  in  the  use  of  building-stone ;  his 
plans  were  correct,  his  arrangements  profoundly  learned  and  his  con- 
ception admirable ;  but  he  was  badly  seconded  by  his  workmen  and 
the  materials  at  his  disposal  were  insufficient.  His  work  is  none  the  less 
a  very  valuable  subject  for  study,  since  it  furnishes  us  with  the  means 
of  learning  the  results  which  the  thirteenth-century  method  of  construe- 


232    DEVELOPMENTS   (.THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 

tion  could  reach.  We  have  given  in  the  article  "  Cathedrale  "  (Fig. 
22)  the  plan  of  the  choir  of  Beauvais.  This  plan,  if  compared  with 
that  of  the  Cathedral  of  Amiens,  shows  that  the  two  parallel  com- 
partments near  the  piers  of  the  transept  are  narrower  than  the  two 
following  ;  the  builder  thus  avoided  too  active  thrusts  upon  the  two 
piers  of  the  transepts  forming  an  entrance  to  the  choir.  As  to  the 
two  following  compartments,  they  are  unusually  wide,  almost  9  metres 
from  axis  to  axis  of  the  piers.  The  need  of  giving  free  spaces  is 
so  evident  at  Beauvais  that  the  piers  of  the  circular  space  are  not 
joined  by  pillars  at  the  sides  to  receive  the  archivolts,  but  only  in 
the  manner  of  radii  of  the  apse,  to  receive  the  groins  of  the  great 
vaults  and  the  transverse  and  diagonal  arches  of  the  aisle. 

In  conformity  with  the  method  of  the  builders  of  that  period,  when 
they  are  not  led  aside  from  their  theory  by  questions  of  economy, 
the  foundation  of  the  choir  is  admirably  built.  The  chapels  rest 
upon  a  solid  circular  masonry,  covered  by  facing-stones,  as  in  the 
Cathedral  of  Amiens  and  presenting  on  the  outside  a  strong  water- 
table,  likewise  faced  in  large  stones,  carefully  dressed  and  set  in 
thick  beds  of  mortar.  This  base  of  solid  masonry  is  connected  with 
the  wall  supporting  the  detached  piers  of  the  chancel  by  radiating 
walls  under  ground. 

In  the  Cathedral  of  Amiens,  wherever  we  have  been  able  to  ex- 
amine the  foundations  clear  to  the  bottom,  we  have  found,  on  the 
outside,  the  profile,  Figure  100. 

At  A  is  a  course  of  clay,  40  centimetres  thick,  set  upon  the  natu- 
ral clay.  At  B  is  a  bed  of  concrete  40  centimetres  thick  ;  next, 
from  C  to  D,  14  courses  from  30  to  40  centimetres  thick,  each  of 
stone  obtained  from  the  quarries  of  Blavelincourt,  near  Amiens. 

This  stone  is  a  mixture  of  chalk  and  silica  and  very  strong,  so 
that  it  can  be  cut  out  in  large  pieces.  Above  this  we  find  a  course 
E  of  stone  from  Croissy,  then  three  courses  of  sandstone  under  the 
outer  earth.  Above  the  ground  level,  the  whole  building  rests  upon 
six  more  courses  of  sandstone,  well  faced  and  of  extreme  hardness. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


233 


Behind  the  facings  of  the  foundation  is  a  mass  of  large  fragments  of 
silex  stone  from  Blavelincourt  and  Croissy,  sunk  in  a  very  hard  and 
well-made  mortar.  It  is  upon  this  artificial  rock  that  the  immense 
cathedral  rests.  At  Notre  Dame  at  Paris  the  foundations  are  like- 
wise built  with  the  greatest  care  and  faced  in  strong  ashlar  of 
great  thickness,  the  whole  resting  upon  solid  soil  —  that  is,  upon 
the  lower  sand  of  the  Seine,  which  is  in  large  grains  of  a  greenish 
color.  As  for  the  piles  which  people  pretend  exist  under  the  ma- 
sonry of  most  of  our  great  cathedrals,  we  have  never  found  any 
traces  of  them.1 

Now  let  us  return  to  Notre  Dame  of  Beauvais. 

We  have  given  in  the  article  "  Arc-Boutant"  (Fig.  61)  the  gen- 
eral view  of  the  system  adopted  for  the  building  of  the  flying-but- 
tresses of  the  apse  of  the  Cathedral  of  Beauvais.  We  must  return 
to  the  details  of  this  construction  and  it  will  be  seen  how  the 
builder  of  this  choir  tried  to  surpass  the  work  of  his  fellow -architects 
at  Amiens.  Yet  these  two  apses  were  built  at  the  same  time,  that 
of  Beauvais  perhaps  being  later  by  some  years.  We  suppose,  just 
as  we  have  done  for  a  flying-buttress  in  the  choir  of  Notre  Dame  of 
Amiens,  a  section  made  through  the  axis  of  the  piers  of  the  apse  at 
Beauvais.  (Fig.  101).  It  is  interesting  to  compare  these  two 
sections  ;  we  therefore  give  them  on  the  same  scale.  At  Amiens,  the 
piers  of  the  chancel  are  14  metres  high  from  the  pavement  of 
the  aisle  to  the  abacus  of  the  capitals  supporting  the  vaults  of  the 
aisles.  At  Beauvais,  these  same  piers  are  15.90  metres.  But  at 
Amiens,  the  absidal  chapels  are  as  high  as  the  aisle,  while  at  Beau- 
vais they  are  much  lower  and  between  the  platforms  that  cover 
them  and  the  vaults  of  this  aisle  there  is  a  gallery,  a  triforium  F. 
At  Amiens  it  is  the  intermediate  pier  which  has  the  passive  rigid 

1  It  is  with  these  piles,  at  Notre  Dame  at  Paris  and  at  Notre  Dame  at  Amiens, 
as  with  so  many  other  fables  that  have  been  repeated  for  centuries  about  the 
building  of  Gothic  edifices.  It  would  be  impossible  to  build  a  great  cathedral 
on  piles.  These  edifices  can  be  founded  only  upon  broad  bases  ;  the  loads  being 
very  unequal  in  amount,  the  first  condition  of  stability  is  to  find  a  perfectly 
homogeneous  and  resistant  mass  under  ground. 


234      DEVELOPMENTS   {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 


Fig.  101.    Flying-Buttresses  at  Beauvais. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


235 


resistance,  thanks  to  its  mass  and  to  the  manner  of  building  the 
lower  piers,  as  we  have  just  shown  ;  the  second  pier  is  only  an  acces- 
sory, a  surety,  an  additional  though  necessary  precaution. 

At  Beauvais  the  master-builder  tried  to  give  this  intermediate 
pier  an  active  resistance  and  to  bring  to  the  second  pier,  the  exte- 
rior one,  the  passive  resistance  which  he  must  always  find  somewhere. 
He  expected  thus  to  be  able  to  secure  more  lightness  in  the  general 
effect  of  his  structure,  more  height  and  more  solidity.  As  we  have 
already  said,  the  piers  E  of  the  chancel  have  more  space,  are  thicker 
than  those  at  Amiens,  in  the  direction  of  the  thrusts. 

The  groups  of  pillars  carrying  the  diagonal  and  wall  arches  of 
the  high  vaults  are  set  in  corbel-form  upon  the  lower  capital  G. 

The  impost  H  1  is  hence  greater  and  the  pier  K  of  the  large  tri- 
forium  rests  vertically  upon  the  lower  pier. 

Upon  this  pier  Kol  the  triforium  there  is  no  longer  one  column, 
as  at  Amiens,  to  receive  the  end  of  the  flying-buttress,  but  two 
smaller  columns  set  against  the  cleavage,  as  seen  by  the  horizontal 
section  A'  made  through  A  B. 

These  two  columns  sustain  the  lintel  L,  which  is  a  course  acting 
as  ceiling.  Two  other  columns  are  set  between  this  lintel-course 
and  the  top  of  the  flying-buttress,  which  rests  against  an  enormous 
block  M  of  stone,  weighted  by  a  course,  as  cornice,  and  a  pedestal 
N  supporting  a  colossal  statue. 

Another  pair  of  pillars  is  placed  in  front  of  this  statue,  between 
the  first  and  the  second  flying-buttresses.  These  latter  pillars  sup- 
port, not  the  top  of  that  flying-buttress,  but  a  pinnacle  whose  form 
and  structure  we  shall  at  once  point  out.  This  whole  system  closely 
resembles  that  which  we  have  seen  at  Amiens.  Yet  we  notice  that 
the  whole  method  of  double  building  exerts  a  vertical  pressure  upon 
the  lower  pier,  whose  interior  is  built  in  courses  and  its  exterior  in 
large,  rigid  pieces,  set  against  the  cleavage,  to  give  firmness  to  the 
structure  at  once  so  slender  and  so  tall;  we  notice,  too,  that  the 
strong  lintel  L,  the  block  J/ and  its  burden  N  tend  evidently  to  add 


236    DEVELOPMENTS    {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 

considerable  weight  to  the  top  of  the  support  below,  in  order  to  keep 
it  vertical  and  make  good  its  function  of  stanchion.1 

Hence  the  inner  pier  is  made  as  rigid  as  possible,  for  it  is  now 
necessary  to  resist  the  thrust  of  the  vault,  acting  from  an  enormous 
height. 

The  architect  felt  unable  to  get  along  with  a  single  flying-buttress, 
as  at  Amiens,  even  were  it  surmounted  by  a  rigid  open-work  ;  he 
was  right,  for  at  Amiens,  in  the  parallel  parts  of  the  choir  which  re- 
ceived three  vault-groins  instead  of  one,  these  flying-buttresses  with 
open-work  were  displaced  by  the  pressure  of  the  vaults  and  in  the 
fifteenth  century  it  was  necessary  to  build  new  flying-buttresses 
under  those  of  the  thirteenth.  But  the  master-builder  of  Beauvais 
here  evinced  an  unparalleled  hardihood  and  at  the  same  time  a  rare 
sagacity.  It  is  seen  that  the  intermediate  pier  0  does  not  rest 
squarely  upon  the  pier  P,  the  summit  of  the  chapel,  as  in  the  Cathe- 
dral of  Amiens,  but  that  its  axis  is  in  the  same  vertical  with  the  inner 
facings  of  that  pier  P. 

Let  us  say  at  once  that  this  pier  O,  whose  horizontal  section 
through  CD  we  give  at  C,  has  greater  weight  in  its  side  C  than 
on  the  side  D.  Its  centre  of  gravity  is  then  inside  of  the  dotted  line 
R,  or,  in  other  words,  above  the  pier  P. 

Still  the  pier  is  thus  in  equilibrium  and  tends  to  incline  towards 
the  interior  of  the  church  rather  than  toward  the  large  outer  but- 
tress; it  succeeds,  then,  by  its  position:  first,  in  drawing  off  the 
thrust  of  the  two  flying-buttresses,  secondly,  in  adding  to  the  resist- 
ance opposed  by  these  flying-buttresses  a  tendency  to  incline  toward 
the  choir. 

The  vertical  pier  0  thus  does  the  duty  of  an  oblique  prop.  If 

this  active  resistance  does  not  suflice  (and  it  cannot  suffice),  the 

pier  0  is  in  its  turn  sustained  in  its  function  by  the  two  secondary 

1  In  the  fourteenth  century  the  columns  placed  upon  the  triforium  had  become 
broken  and  there  was  placed  instead  of  them  a  solid  pier  (See  Fig.  61,  article 
"  Arc-BoutanV) ;  but  it  is  still  possible  to-day  to  recognize  their  position  and  ap- 
proximately their  diameter. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


237 


flying-buttresses  S  and  T  and  by  the  large  passive  buttress.  But, 
some  one  may  object,  why  this  intermediate  pier  ?  Why  do  not  the 
large  flying-buttresses  rest  simply  upon  the  large  passive  buttress 
without? 

It  is  because  the  large  outer  pier  could  not  buttress  the  thrust  of 
flying-buttresses  of  so  great  radius,  without  being  doubly  augmented 

A 

B 


Fig.  1016. 


and  because,  thanks  to  the  intermediate  pier  0,  it  has  only  to  but- 
tress a  pressure  that  is  diffused  and  almost  annulled. 

To  explain  clearly  the  function  of  the  pier  0,  let  us  suppose  that 
we  have  to  put  props  under  the  choir  of  Beauvais  and  let  us  sup- 
pose that  we  have  only  the  large  buttress  to  place  our  props  upon. 

If  (Fig.  101&)  we  set  our  props  as  indicated  in  A,  we  shall 
surely  overturn  the  pier  C  ;  but  if  against  the  pier  C  we  place,  ac- 
cording to  the  drawing  B,  an  intermediate  prop  D  E,  slightly 


DEVELOPMENTS  {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 


0\c. 


inclined  toward  the  choir 
but  kept  in  a  vertical  plane 
passing  through  the  axis  of 
the  piers  or  the  radius  of  the 
chancel  and  if  from  that 
prop  we  extend  two  sup- 
ports F  and  G  against  the 
vault  and  then  two  others 
at  H  I,  we  shall  no  longer 
need  to  fear  the  effect  of 
the  thrusts  of  the  vaults  V 
upon  the  great  buttress  C, 
for  the  intermediate  prop 
D  E  will  draw  off  a  large 
part  of  the  thrust  by  the  two 
supports  F  G  and  will 
transmit  it  to  its  base  D. 
This  is  the  whole  problem 
given  and  solved  by  the  ar- 
chitect of  the  choir  at  Beau- 
vais.  Unhappily,  the  exe- 
cution is  defective.  Still, 
it  is  certain  that  this  im- 
mense edifice  would  have 
kept  perfect  stability  if  the 
architect  had  made  the  two 
pillars  above  the  triforium 
stronger  and  more  resistant, 
if  he  could  have  made  them 
of  cast-iron,  for  instance. 
The  disorders  which  have 
occurred  in  the  structure 
have  all  come  from  this; 
these  columns,  too  slender, 
have  given  way,  for  they 
could  not  resist  the  weight 
F'ying"carhXe|S.,Ch0ir0f  BeaUVa'S  brought  upon   them  when 


CONSTRUCTION. 


239 


the  inner  piers  began  to  settle  in  consequence  of  the  drying  of  the 
mortar.  In  the  disorder  the  lintels  L  (Fig.  101)  were  broken,  the 
large  blocks  ftf,  in  swaying,  rested  too  heavily  upon  the  top  of  the  first 
flying-buttress ,  this  latter  was  thrust  out  of  shape  and,  the  vault 
following  the  movement,  the  pressure  upon  these  flying-buttresses 
was  such  that  they  nearly  all  were  forced  outward  and  their  action 
annulled,  while,  in  consequence,  the  upper  flying-buttresses  were 
loosened  somewhat,  since  the  vault  no  longer  pressed  against  them. 
The  equilibrium  was  broken ;  and  considerable  labor  was  needed  to 
avoid  the  total  ruin  of  the  edifice. 

Figure  101c  gives  in  perspective  the  summit  of  the  piers  receiving 
the  tops  of  the  flying-buttresses  and  shows  us  clearly  that  the  inten- 
tion of  the  master-builder  was  to  obtain  at  the  height  of  the  piers 
of  the  choir  of  the  Cathedral  of  Beauvais  and  under  the  flying 
buttresses,  supports  not  solid,  but  perfectly  rigid,  in  order,  first,  to 
load  the  lower  piers  as  little  as  possible  ;  and  secondly,  to  make  the 
settling  of  the  interior  parts,  built  in  courses  and  stiffened  by  the 
pillars  set  against  the  stratum,  naturally  carry  the  weights  inward. 
From  this  example  and  from  those  belonging  to  Gothic  construction 
properly  so-called,  there  is  derived  this  principle :  that  every  struct- 
ure built  of  courses  set  upon  one  another  in  large  quantities  must 
be  supported  and  made  rigid  by  the  addition  of  monoliths  surround- 
ing, flanking  and  sustaining  the  piers  composed  of  courses.  This 
principle  is  scarcely  applied  by  the  Romans,  who  had  no  need  to  re- 
sort to  it ;  it  belongs  to  the  Gothic  builders.  From  this  principle 
they  make  one  of  the  most  ordinary  motifs  for  the  decoration  of 
buildings  and,  in  fact,  it  lends  itself  to  the  most  brilliant  and  daring 
arrangements. 

It  is  true,  that,  in  the  example  of  construction  just  given  to  our 
readers,  there  are  grave  defects  and  we  do  not  disguise  them.  That 
outer  scaffolding  of  stone,  which  forms  the  whole  strength  of  the 
building,  is  subjected  to  the  action  of  the  atmosphere  ;  it  seems  as 
if  the  builder,  instead  of  trying  to  protect  the  vital  parts  of  his 


240    DEVELOPMENTS  {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 


structure,  had  taken  pleasure  in  exposing  them  to  all  the  chances  of 
destruction.  His  system  of  equilibrium  depends  upon  the  absolute 
resistance  of  materials  too  often  imperfect.  He  evidently  wishes  to 
astonish  and  he  sacrifices  everything  to  this  desire. 

But  beside  these  grave  defects,  what  profound  knowledge  of  the 
laws  of  equilibrium  !  what  subjection  of  matter  to  the  idea !  what  a 
theory,  fertile  in  applications !  Let  us  never  imitate  these  subtile 
constructions,  but  let  us  profit  boldly  by  the  acquisition  of  so  much 
knowledge.    But  to  profit  by  it,  we  must  cultivate  and  exercise  it. 

In  the  article  "Chainage  "  we  have  shown  what  were  the  processes 
used  during  the  Middle  Ages  for  anchoring  the  edifices.  For  the 
long  beams  of  wood,  used  during  the  .Romanesque  period,  the  builders 
of  the  thirteenth  century,  seeing  that  these  soon  decayed,  substituted 
cramp-irons  uniting  the  stones  composing  the  courses.  This  method 
was  never,  at  any  time,  employed  with  such  singular  exaggeration 
as  in  Ile-de-France.  There  are  edifices,  like  the  Sainte-Chapelle-du- 
Palais  at  Paris,  where  all  the  courses,  from  base  to  summit,  are 
fastened  by  irons.  At  Notre  Dame  in  Paris  even,  it  is  seen  that  all 
the  structures  raised  or  repaired  after  the  early  years  of  the  thir- 
teenth century  are,  at  heights  not  far  separated,  fastened  by  cramps 
set  in  lead.  Certainly  these  builders  had  not  entire  confidence  in 
their  very  ingenious  devices  and  their  innate  good  sense  made  them 
soon  feel  that  they  were  carrying  their  boldness  too  far.  The  way 
in  which  these  anchorages  are  arranged  shows,  moreover,  that  what 
they  feared  most  was  the  bending  or  twisting  of  the  piers  and  walls ; 
and  in  that  regard  the  system  of  stone  posts  adopted  by  the  Bur- 
gundian  architects  had  a  marked  superiority  over  the  dangerous  use 
of  cramp-irons  sealed  up  in  solid  masonry.  It  must  also  be  said  that 
the  builders  of  Ile-de-France  found  difficulty  in  procuring  long 
stones  resistant  enough  and  capable  of  being  set  with  impunity 
against  the  cleavage,  while  in  Burgundy  these  were  common  and  of 
excellent  quality. 

It  is  time  now  to  introduce  our  readers  to  an  edifice  which,  in 


CONSTRUCTION. 


241 


itself  alone,  embodies  and  at  the  same  time  skilfully  exaggerates  all 
the  theories  of  the  builders  of  the  Gothic  school.  We  refer  to  the 
church  of  St.  Urbain  of  Troyes. 

In  1261,  Jacques  Pantale'on,  a  native  of  Troyes,  was  chosen  pope, 
under  the  name  of  Urbain  IV,  at  Viterbo;  he  died  in  1264.  During 


Fig.  102.    St.  Urbain,  Troyes. 

his  pontificate,  he  wished  to  erect  at  Troyes  a  church  under  the 
name  of  St.  Urbain ;  so  this  monument  was  begun  and  rapidly  pro- 
gressed; nevertheless,  it  remained  unfinished,  as  the  successor  of 
Urbain  probably  did  not  think  it  proper  to  continue  the  work  of  his 
predecessor.    Such  as  it  is,  the  church  of  St.  Urbain  of  Troyes 


242    DEVELOPMENTS  {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 


shows,  through  the  master-builder,  who  was  intrusted  with  its  con- 
struction, a  singular  hardihood  and  a  truly  amazing  knowledge  of 
building.  If  the  date  of  the  foundation  of  the  church  of  St.  Urbain 
and  that  of  the  interruption  of  the  work  were  not  historical  facts 
of  undeniable  authenticity  one  would  be  tempted  to  suppose  that  this 
edifice  was  built  toward  the  beginning  of  the  fourteenth  century. 

We  ourselves,  despite  proofs  so  incontrovertible,  have  long  hesi- 
tated before  believing  that  the  thirteenth  century  had  seen  begun 
and  finished  what  there  was  of  this  monument ;  being  in  the  habit 
of  relying  first  of  all  upon  archaeological  signs,  we  could  not  give  to 
the  construction  of  Saint  Urbain  a  date  earlier  than  the  fourteenth 
century ;  but  a  profound  study  of  the  structure  has  shown  that 
historical  tradition  was  in  accord  with  fact.  They  no  longer  built 
thus  in  the  fourteenth  century.  Only,  the  architect  of  St.  Urbain 
was  one  of  those  artists  in  whom  the  most  advanced  theoretical 
principles  are  allied  to  a  profound  experience,  to  a  skill  that  is 
never  at  fault,  to  a  sure  knowledge  of  the  quality  of  the  materials,  to 
infinite  resources  in  execution  and  to  natural  originality  ;  he  was, 
to  put  it  briefly,  a  man  of  genius.  His  name  is  unknown  to  us,  like 
those  of  most  of  these  laborious  artists;  if  Urbain  IV  had  sent  from 
Italy  an  architect  to  build  his  church  at  Troyes,  certainly  we  should 
have  known  it,  but  we  should  not  have  to  spend  much  time  over  his 
work,  for  Southern  Italy  at  that  time  was  raising  only  structures 
that  do  not  furnish  types  suitable  for  study. 

The  plan  of  the  church  of  St.  Urbain  of  Troyes  belongs  to  Cham- 
pagne. The  choir  recalls  that  of  the  little  church  of  Rieux,  that 
we  have  already  given  ;  upon  the  four  piers  of  the  crossing  there 
was  to  be  a  tower,  probably  very  high,  if  one  examines  the  broad 
section  of  these  piers.  Two  other  spires  flanked  the  entrance, 
accompanied  by  a  porch  projecting  like  that  of  the  church  of  St. 
Nicaise,  at  Rheims.  The  central  tower  was  not  commenced  and  the 
nave  and  facade  remained  unfinished.  From  what  remains  of  these 
parts  one  can  give  an  exact  account  of  what  this  church  was  to  be. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


243 


The  choir  and  the  transepts  are  complete.  Let  us  cast  our  eyes 
first  upon  the  plan  of  the  church  of  St.  Urbain  (Fig.  102)  taken  at 
the  ground-floor ;  this  general  view  is  necessary  in  order  to  appre- 
ciate the  different  parts  of  its  structure.  This  plan  presents  points 
of  support  that  are  solid,  thick  and  resistant,  a  very  simple  general 
arrangement. 

Placed  between  two  streets,  two  deep  and  well-protected  porches 
give  entrance  to  the  two  arms  of  the  transept.  Above  the  ground- 
floor,  at  a  height  of  3.30  metres,  the  whole  building  looks  like  a 
lantern  of  glass  of  extreme  lightness  and  supported  by  the  but- 
tresses, which  alone  remain  solid,  as  far  as  the  gutters  above.  Hence 
it  is  the  construction  of  these  buttresses  which  must  occupy  us  in 
the  first  place. 

Figure  103  gives  one  of  the  buttresses  of  the  apse  parallel  to  one 
of  the  lateral  surfaces.  The  solid  basement,  3.30  metres  high,  ends 
at  A.  At  B'  is  drawn  the  horizontal  section  of  the  pier  at  the  level 
B  and  at  C  the  horizontal  section  at  the  level  C.  D  is  the  open- 
work set  with  glass  outside  of  the  gallery  G;  F  is  the  free  open-work 
holding  the  ceiling  H,  which  serves  as  a  passage  on  the  level  of  the 
supports  of  the  large  upper  windows ;  E,  the  mullions  of  these  glass 
windows.  The  archivolts  of  the  windows,  whose  extremity  is  at  /, 
serve  as  wall-arches  to  the  great  vaults.  The  gutter,  K,  above  is 
supported  on  the  inside  by  the  filling  placed  upon  the  archivolts  / 
and  on  the  outside  by  an  arch  L  and  a  whole  system  of  open-work, 
whose  details  we  will  soon  give. 

The  open-work  at  D  and  F  is  partly  set  in  grooves,  so  that  these 
are  both  independent  of  the  piers  and  are  real  sashes  of  stone,  en- 
closed between  the  buttresses. 

Let  us  say  one  word  about  the  materials  which  enter  into  this 
structure,  for  their  quality  is  partly  the  cause  of  the  system  adopted. 
Even  at  Troyes,  they  could  not  procure  freestone ;  for  the  region 
furnished  only  chalk,  good,  at  best,  only  to  make  the  filling  for  vaults. 
The  architect  of  St.  Urbain  had  to  bring  stone  from  Tonnerre  for 


244   DEVELOPMENTS   {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 


CONSTRUCTION.  245 

the  facings  and  in  order  to  economize  these  materials,  transported 
at  great  cost,  he  used,  so  far  as  he  could,  a  certain  stone  called  Bur- 
gundian,  found  several  leagues  from  Troyes  and  proving  to  be  only 
a  coarse  limestone,  firm  enough,  but  in  shallow  courses  and  cutting 
badly.  It  is  with  these  latter  materials  that  he  built  the  solid  part 
of  the  piers,  covering  their  outer  surface  M  with  great  slabs  of  stone 
from  Tonnerre,  set  against  the  cleavage  and  finely  cut.  So,  also, 
with  the  stone  of  Tonnerre  he  built  the  inner  piers,  the  open-work, 
the  arches,  the  gutters  and  all  the  delicate  members  of  the  structure; 
now,  the  stone  of  Tonnerre  here  used  is  a  species  not  very  thick, 
but  of  great  resistance,  firmness  and  compactness  and  capable  of 
being  set  against  the  cleavage  without  danger.  In  fact,  this  building 
is  a  structure  of  scappled  stones,  solid  but  clumsy,  finished  off 
with  a  fine  and  very  beautiful  stone,  used  with  the  strictest  economy, 
as  we  would  use  marble  to-day. 

The  lightness  of  the  open-work  and  the  mullions  surpasses  all  that 
we  know  of  in  this  class  of  work  and  yet  the  materials  used  have 
been  so  well  chosen  and  the  elasticity  of  the  structure  is  so  complete 
that  very  few  of  the  pieces  are  broken.  Moreover,  as  the  structure 
is  perfectly  solid  and  well  balanced,  the  injuries  occurring  to  the 
open-work  and  windows  have  no  importance,  since  the  latter  can  be 
easily  replaced,  like  real  sashes,  without  affecting  the  principal 
structure. 

The  anatomy  of  this  building  must  be  examined  with  the  greatest 
care.  We  shall  try  to  bring  out  the  details  vividly  before  the  reader. 

First,  then,  let  us  take  that  part  of  the  pier  included  between  H 
and  0  —  that  is,  the  ceiling  of  the  gallery  and  its  lintel  joining  the 
inner  pier  to  the  outer  one,  the  casings  of  the  open-work  and 
the  drainage  for  the  water  at  this  point. 

At  A  (Fig.  104)  we  see  the  section  taken  through  the  axis  of  the 
outer  and  inner  piers.  D  is  the  gargoyle  throwing  off  the  water 
collected  in  the  passage  G  —  that  is  to  say,  not  only  the  rain  which 
falls  vertically  upon  this  slab,  which  is  a  small  matter,  but  that 


246   DEVELOPMENTS    {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 


which  beats  against  the  glass ;  C  is  the  gutter  of  the  roof,  acting  as 
bond-stone  —  that  is,  extending  through  the  whole  thickness  of  the 
pier  ;  D  is  the  console  sustaining  the  lintel  E,  which  serves  as  gutter- 


Fig.  I  04.    Detail  of  Pier  and  Buttress,  St.  Urbain,  Troyes. 


stone  and  joins  the  inner  pier  H  to  the  outer  one ;  F  is  the  course  of 
the  roof  of  the  gallery  and  supports  the  gutter ;  /,  the  two  cheeks 
forming  outer  facings  and  holding  the  lintel  gutter  E,  as  shown  at 


CONSTRUCTION. 


247 


/'  by  the  perspective  detail  K.  In  this  detail  the  piece  E'  is  the 
lintel-gutter  ;  C,  the  second  gutter-stone  and  B'  the  gargoyle.  The 
large  detail  L  shows,  in  place,  the  two  pieces  /  at  the  gutter  C  at 
C"  and  the  roof  piece  F  at  F"  with  the  lintel  E  at  E".  All  this 
arrangement  is  made  with  the  greatest  care,  the  stones  being  well 
cut  and  well  set ;  accordingly  no  rupture  is  seen. 

Let  us  notice  that  the  gutter-lintel  E  (detail  A)  is  left  free  in  its 
course  from  R  to  S  under  the  pieces  / —  that  is  to  say,  the  bed  R  S 
is  thick  and  cemented  only  after  the  settling  of  the  structure  has 
produced  its  effects,  so  as  to  avoid  all  chance  of  rupture. 

We  see  at  M  (detail  L)  the  rebates  destined  to  receive  the  outer 
glass  windows  of  the  gallery  and  at  TV  those  destined  to  receive  the 
inner  open-work  supporting  the  roof-piece  and  the  mullions  of 
the  windows. 

How  can  open-work  so  delicate  as  in  these  two  windows  be  kept 
in  vertical  planes  ? 

That  on  the  interior  is  only  21  centimetres  thick,  and  that  on  ihe 
exterior  22  centimetres  including  all  projections.  Their  rigidity  is 
obtained  by  the  simplest  means,  in  that  the  arching  of  each  of  them, 
included  between  the  rebates  of  which  we  have  already  spoken,  is  in 
one  piece.  Each  section  of  open-work,  then,  is  composed  of  but 
three  pieces:  two  jambs  and  an  upright  slab  pierced  with  open- 
ings. 

We  must  not  forget  what  has  been  said  previously  about  the  mate- 
rials used  in  building  the  church  of  St.  Urbain.  The  architect  had 
made  his  structure  of  resistance  out  of  common  stone,  a  sort  of  blocks 
worked  with  the  pick  ;  and  whatever  was  only  accessory,  like  deco- 
ration, gutters,  open-work,  were  of  the  stone  of  Tonnerre,  shallow 
and  very  firm  ledges,  but  of  great  length  and  width.  These  stones 
of  Tonnerre  are  really  only  flags,  whose  thickness  varies  from  20 
centimetres  to  30  centimetres  and  are  of  excellent  quality. 

The  edifice  consists  only  of  piers  between  which  are  placed  up- 
right slabs  with  apertures.    This  singular  system  of  building  is 


248    DEVELOPMENTS  {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 

applied  everywhere  with  that  rigorous  logic  which  characterizes  ar- 
chitecture at  the  end  of  the  thirteenth  century.1 


Fig.  I  05.    Outer  Open-work  of  Gallery,  St.  Urbain,  Troyes. 

1  How  does  it  happen  that  we,  who  to-day  have  cast-iron,  or  can  procure  stones 
of  excellent  quality  and  in  large  pieces,  have  not  thought  of  putting  into  prac- 
tice the  method  so  happily  applied  in  the  building  of  the  church  of  St.  Urbain? 
What  resources  might  we  not  find  in  the  study  and  the  use  of  this  system,  so 
true,  so  simple  and  so  well  adapted  to  many  of  our  edifices  in  which  are 
demanded  large  windows,  lightness  and  swiftness  of  erection? 


CONSTRUCTION. 


249 


Let  us  take,  then,  the  outer  open-work  of  the  gallery  in  the  church 
of  St.  Urbain  and  see  how  it  is  cut  and  kept  vertical. 

We  represent  it  here  in  the  plan  A  (Fig.  105),  in  its  outer  eleva- 
tion B  and  in  its  section  C. 

The  roofing-stone  D,  making  the  two  sets  of  arches  firm  and  form- 
ing a  gutter  and  a  support  for  the  upper  windows,  is  made  of  one  or 
two  pieces  joined  to  the  pieces  under  the  inner  pillars  outlined  in 
F",  in  the  detail  of  Figure  104. 

To  give  more  weight  and  more  rigidity  to  the  great  slab,  which  is 
cut  out  so  as  to  form  the  exterior  arching  set  with  glass  (Fig.  105), 
whose  section  is  drawn  at  E,  this  slab  has  a  railing  G  joined  to  it 
and  made  of  the  same  piece,  so  that  the  gutter  D,  forming  the  ceiling 
of  the  gallery,  rests  upon  a  projection  reserved  on  the  interior  along 
the  outer  arching,  while  the  lower  bed  of  this  ceiling  is  made  fast  to 
the  inner  arching,  also  composed  of  a  large  slab  set  upon  end,  with 
windows  cut  through  and  held  at  its  extremities  by  the  rebates  N, 
of  our  detail  L,  in  Figure  104. 

We  ought  to  say  that  to  produce  a  more  pleasing  effect,  the  archi- 
tect has  given  the  interior  arched  open-work  a  more  delicate  design 
and  a  different  form  from  that  of  the  exterior  arching;  and  these 
two  openings  produce  the  most  brilliant  pattern  and  wonderful  effects 
resulting  from  the  insertion  of  stained-glass.1 

Let  us  now  look  at  the  upper  part  of  the  structure  of  the  choir  of 

!The  decoration  -which  encloses  the  chancel  of  St.  Urbain  was  probably  not 
admired  by  everybody  at  Troyes;  for,  some  years  ago  they  had  the  idea  of  con- 
cealing it  by  an  enormous  decoration  of  pine  wood  and  stucco,  painted  white. 
Nothing  is  more  ridiculous  than  that  scaffolding  of  stucco,  which  displays  its 
pretentious  wretchedness  in  front  of  one  of  the  most  charming  conceptions  of 
the  art  of  the  thirteenth  century  in  its  decline.  The  barbarism  that  destroys  is 
certainly  more  dangerous  than  the  barbarism  of  the  authors  of  the  high  altar  of 
St.  Urbain;  but,  still,  what  would  the  friends  of  the  arts  in  Europe  say  if  they 
saw  a  facade  moulded  in  plaster  erected  in  front  of  the  western  fagade  of  the 
court  of  the  Louvre,  under  pretext  of  embellishment?  How  much  progress  we 
have  still  to  make  in  order  not  to  merit  the  title  of  barbarian,  which  Ave  give  so 
freely  to  periods  when  certainly  no  one  would  have  been  permitted  to  hide  a 
work  executed  with  intelligence,  care  ami  talent  behind  a  useless  overgrowth 
coarse  in  material  and  workmanship,  without  form  ami  without  taste,  a  product 
of  ignorance  combined  with  the  most  ridiculous  vanity. 


250    DEVELOPMENTS  {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 


St.  Urbain,  for  there  the  architect  has  displayed  a  remarkable 
sagacity. 

If  we  refer  to  Figure  103,  we  shall  notice  that  the  upper  windows 
are  set  in  a  vertical  line  with  the  coping  of  the  roof  at  /,  that  their 
archivolts  serve  both  as  wall-arches  and  as  relieving-arches  for  carry- 
ing the  trusses  and  that  the  gutter  K  rests  partly  upon  a  projection 
reserved  above  this  archivolt  and  partly  upon  a  piece  of  open-work 
L,  fixed  about  50  centimetres  in  front  of  the  window. 

Figure  106  gives  at  A  the  outer  surface  of  this  open-work  and  at 
B  the  section  made  through  C  D  E  F.  In  this  section,  we  find  at  G, 
the  section  of  the  window,  at  H,  its  archivolt-wall-arch  and  at  /,  the 
vault. 

The  open-work  supporting  the  gutter  K  consists  of  an  arch  rein- 
forced by  a  gable,  performing  the  duty  of  a  tie. 

The  open  circles  L  help  to  sustain  the  gutter  along  its  extent  from 
E  to  M.  This  gutter,  in  each  compartment,  is  made  only  of  two 
pieces  of  stone,  joined  at  the  apex  of  the  slopes  at  iV;  and  each  of 
these  pieces  is  cut  as  indicated  in  0,  its  junction  with  the  open-work 
taking  place  from  E'  to  M'  and  the  part  P  being  cut  out  and  having 
no  drip-stone,  in  order  to  let  the  summit  of  the  gable  go  through. 

The  pattern  of  the  gable  and  the  circular  openings  L  are  faith- 
fully drawn  upon  our  figure.  The  finial  (its  shaft  penetrating  the 
balustrade)  and  the  point  of  the  gable  are  made  of  a  single  piece  of 
stone,  so  as  to  add  the  necessary  weight  to  the  extremity  of  the 
pattern.  But  to  avoid  all  chance  of  the  gable  being  thrown  down 
outward,  the  two  pieces  of  the  balustrade  R  are  not  placed  in  a 
straight  line,  but  form  an  angle  slightly  obtuse,  as  shown  in  the  plan 
S;  T  being  the  shaft  of  the  finial  at  the  top  of  the  gable  and  R'  R' 
being  the  two  parts  of  the  balustrade  cut  each  from  a  single  slab. 

Hence  the  apex  T  of  the  gable  cannot  be  thrown  outward,  sup- 
ported as  it  is  by  the  two  open-work  slabs  R'  R',  which  rest  on  the 
tops  of  the  piers  pierced  by  gargoyles  to  drain  off  the  water,  as  seen 
in  V. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


251 


This  is  rather  an  arrangement  of  carpentry  than  a  structure  of 
masonry ;  but  we  must  not  forget  that  the  quality  of  stone  used  at 
St.  Urbain  lends  itself  to  such  a  structure  and  that,  thanks  to  these 
artifices,  the  architect  has  been  able  to  raise  a  structure  of  ex- 
traordinary lightness,  which  consists,  in  reality,  only  of  a  masonry 
of  rough  stone  and  upright  slabs,  pierced  with  openings. 

The  flying-buttresses  which  support  the  great  vaults  of  this  church 
above  the  chapels  are  built  in  conformity  with  this  system  of  open- 
work  and  of  large  pieces  of  stone  set  like  props  [see  "Arc-Boutant," 
Fig.  66]. 

The  architect  of  the  church  of  St.  Urbain  (his  scheme  being 
accepted)  has  been  faithful  to  his  principle  in  all  the  parts  of  his 
construction.  He  has  understood  that  in  a  church  so  light,  built 
with  stones  and  slabs,  it  was  necessary  to  allow  this  open-work  great 
freedom  in  order  to  avoid  ruptures ;  wherefore,  he  has  fitted  these 
slabs  only  into  grooves  that  permit  the  masonry  to  settle,  without 
breaking  the  delicate  tracery  which  constitutes  the  walls. 

We  see  by  examining  Figure  106  that  the  gutters  are  free,  almost 
like  pipes  and  that,  even  in  case  of  a  break,  the  dripping  of  the  water 
could  cause  no  injury  to  the  masonry,  since  these  gutters  are  sus- 
pended over  vacant  spaces  without,  by  means  of  these  open  gables. 

It  was  necessary  to  be  bold  to  conceive  a  structure  of  this  kind; 
it  was  necessary  to  be  skilful  and  careful  in  execution,  to  calculate 
and  forsee  everything  and  to  leave  nothing  to  chance ;  so,  this 
structure,  despite  its  excessive  lightness  and  despite  neglect  and 
unintelligent  repairs,  is  still  solid  after  six  hundred  and  odd  years 
of  existence. 

The  architect  required  from  the  quarries  of  Tonnerre  only 
slabs  30  centimetres  thick  at  the  utmost,  of  great  dimensions,  it  is 
true,  but  of  comparatively  light  weight ;  he  thus  avoided  the  greatest 
expense  at  that  period  —  that  of  transportation.  As  to  the  handi- 
work, it  is  considerable;  but  in  those  days  this  did  not  cost  the 
most. 


DEVELOPMENTS   {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 


Fig.  I  06.    Gable  Open-work  of  Gallery,  St.  Urbain,  Troyes. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


253 


The  church  of  St.  Urbain  will  often  appear  in  the  course  of  this 
work,  for  it  is  certainly  the  utmost  limit  to  which  building  in  stone 
can  attain  and  as  an  architectural  composition  it  is  a  masterpiece 
[see  "Arc-Boulant"  "Balustrade  "  "Croix"  "Fenetre"  "Gargouille" 
"Porcke,"  "Porte,"  "  Vitraux"\ 

We  must  now  retrace  our  steps  somewhat.  In  Ile-de-France,  as 
we  have  already  observed,  we  could  not  point  out  the  boldness  of  the 
Burgundians  at  the  beginning  of  the  thirteenth  century,  or  that  of 
the  architects  of  Champagne  at  the  end  of  that  century,  when  these 


which  seem  to  them  to  pre- 

Fig.  I  07.  .  .  .      ,  , 

sent  an  insufficient  base. 

We  find  a  remarkable  proof  of  this  fact,  from  the  middle  of  the 
thirteenth  century,  in  the  great  constructions. 

We  have  seen  that  the  Gothic  architects  had  arrived,  in  vaulted 
edifices,  at  considering  the  wall-arches  as  relieving-arches  and  at 
taking  out  the  structure  under  these  wall-arches,  so  as  to  keep  only 
buttresses.  They  did  away  with  the  walls  as  being  a  useless  accumu- 
lation of  material  between  these  buttresses,  since  the  latter  had  to 
receive  and  support  all  the  weights;  but  these  wall-arches,  not 
being  weighted  at  the  key,  might  deviate  from  the  perpendicular, 


a- 


latter  could  use  large 
materials,  hard,  close-grained 
and  resistant,  like  the  stone 
of  Tonnerre. 


The  builders  of  Ile-de- 
France  make  scarcely  any  of 
that  open-work,  formed  of  a 
single  stone,  those  partitions 
pierced  with  openings :  they 
keep  the  stability  of  their 
edifices  less  by  rigid  surfaces 
and  supports  than  by  weights 
accumulated  at  the  points 


254    DEVELOPMENTS  {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 


because  of  the  pressure  and  the  thrust  of  the  rows  of  filling  stones  in 
the  vaults  which  they  supported. 

Let  us  remark  (Fig.  107)  that  the  wall-arch  A  B  C  at  the  apex  of 
its  two  branches,  at  the  key  B,  where  this  pointed  arch  shows  the 
greatest  flexibility,  receives  the  very  last  rows  of  stones  in  the  filling 
B  Z),  which  have  a  slight  thrust  from  D  to  B,  because  of  their 
curvature. 

It  might  happen  that  the  apex  B  would  be  thrust  out  of  the 
vertical,  if  not  made  immovable.  To  build  a  wall  upon  this  arch 
ABC  could  strengthen  the  arch  very  little,  since  the  two  triangles 
of  masonry  A  E  B  and  C  F  B  press  far  more  upon  the  haunches  of 
this  arch  than  its  key  B.  The  surest  plan  was  to  load  the  key  B, 
Hence  the  builders  arrived,  by  the  middle  of  the  thirteenth  century, 
at  building  outside,  upon  the  wall- arches  of  the  vaults,  gables  H I  G, 
of  masonry,  framing  the  apertures  and  thus  rendering,  by  this 
additional  weight  B  G,  the  summits  of  the  wall-arches  immovable,  or 
at  least  stable  enough  to  resist  the  thrust  from  the  keys  of  the  vault- 
fillings  B  D. 

One  of  the  first  attempts  of  this  kind  is  seen  in  the  Sainte-Chapelle- 
du-Palais,  at  Paris. 

Let  us  observe  that  the  architects  of  Champagne,  who  had  adopted 
wall-arches  of  strong  resistance  because  of  their  great  thickness, 
since  they  were  real  pointed  cradle-vaults,  to  receive  the  fillings  of 
the  vaults;  and  that  the  Burgundian  architects,  who  detached  their 
wall-arches  from  the  outer  partitions,  leaving  between  them  and 
these  partitions  a  rather  broad  space  supported  by  the  courses  of 
the  crowning  piece,  had  no  need  to  resort  to  the  artifice  explained  in 
Figure  107. 

It  was  only  in  Ile-de-France,  Beauvoisis  and  Picardy  that  we  see, 
toward  1240,  the  adoption  of  this  means  of  giving  stability  to  the 
wall-arches.  Thus  the  differences  in  the  character  of  the  archi- 
tecture of  the  various  provinces  of  France,  in  the  thirteenth  century, 
are  nearly  always  to  be  explained  by  a  necessity  of  building.  If 


CONSTRUCTION. 


255 


any  one  wishes  to  learn  about  the  usefulness  of  these  gables,  regarded 
generally  as  ornaments,  he  must  examine  Figure  108. 

But  architecture  is  an  imporious  art.    As  soon  as  you  modify  one 


Fig.  108. 

of  its  members,  as  soon  as  you  add  anything  to  the  arrangement, 
you  see  the  difficulties  of  detail  accumulating.  A  first  change  in  the 
system,  which  you  suppose  trivial  at  first,  demands  a  second,  then  a 


256    DEVELOPMENTS   (THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 


third,  then  a  crowd  of  others.  Hence  you  must  either  go  back- 
wards, or  become  the  slave  of  necessities  which  you  have  evoked  by  a 
first  attempt,  or  a  first  concession. 

One  struggles  against  these  successive  difficulties  which  seem  to 
arise  in  proportion  as  he  overcomes  them.  In  days  when  idleness 
of  mind  is  regarded  as  a  virtue,  men  treat  these  perilous  attempts  as 
vicious  tendencies,  as  forgetfulness  of  sound  doctrine.  But  the 
architects  of  the  Middle  Ages  and  especially  oi  that  period  which 
now  occupies  us,  would  never  have  thought  that  a  step  backward  or 
a  repentance  was  progress ;  they  felt  that  they  were  led  by  their 
own  principles  and  they  solved  courageously  each  of  the  new  diffi- 
culties which  they  were  continually  raising. 

To  surmount  the  wall-arches  with  triangles  of  stone,  in  order  to 
weight  their  keys,  means  at  first  only  a  little  more  stone  and  a  little 
more  handwork.  But  there  must  be  gutters  upon  the  wall-arches, 
and  balustrades  above  the  gutters ;  these  gutters  must  rest  upon  the 
arches  and  not  upon  the  filling  of  the  vaults;  the  slopes  of  the  gables 
must  themselves  throw  oft0  the  water  in  some  way ;  these  rigid 
lines  must  be  embellished ;  and  this  new  member  added  to  the  archi- 
tecture must  find  a  place  without  intruding  upon  that  of  other  indis 
pensable  members. 

Figure  108  explains  how  the  builders  at  the  middle  of  the  thir- 
teenth century  were  able  to  reconcile  at  once  both  the  purely  mate- 
rial requirements  and  those  of  Art. 

They  set  over  their  wall-arch  A  (see  the  section),  often  strength- 
ened and  doubled  by  an  archivolt  B,  having  the  thickness  of  the 
filling-stones  of  the  vault,  about  two-thirds  ot  the  width  of  these 
arches,  the  solid  gable  C,  leaving  a  shallow  notch  at  its  base  in 
order  to  fit  in  the  gutter  D,  set  over  the  remaining  third  part  of  the 
width  of  the  arch.  The  gable  being  detached,  this  gutter  had  a  drip- 
stone overlapping  the  cornice,  as  seen  in  E  and  received  the  balus- 
trade, as  usual,  in  a  groove. 

Two  stones  E,  carrying  a  basin  and  gargoyles,  were  placed  at 


CONSTRUCTION. 


257 


the  base  of  the  gable  to  collect  the  water  falling  upon  the  roof-pieces 
of  these  gables.  These  roof-pieces,  made  in  long  sections  to  avoid 
joints,  were  cut  according  to  the  outline  G  and  beneath  the  cornice 
were  imbedded  in  the  tympanum  and  were  provided,  behind  the 
crockets,  set  in  grooves,  with  a  little  furrow  /,  suitable  for  collecting 
the  water  and  guiding  it  to  the  basins  of  the  gargoyles. 

Above  the  cornice  these  roof-pieces  were  then  cut  according  to  the 
drawing  H,  throwing  off  the  water  in  front  and  behind.  A  head- 
piece K,  made  in  one  piece  of  stone,  maintained  the  extremities  of 
the  two  inclined  roof-pieces,  as  also  the  branches  of  crockets.  The 
balustrade  L  was  set  behind,  level  with  the  rear  surface  of  the  gable, 
in  order  to  make  way  for  the  rows  of  crockets  M  inlaid  in  the 
grooves.  Later  they  completely  hollowed  out  these  gables,  which 
appeared  too  heavy  to  the  eye,  above  such  light  mullions  in  the  win- 
dows. This  example  shows  how  each  new  member  added  to  the 
Gothic  architecture  led  to  a  series  of  details,  studies  and  combinations. 

Some  one  will  perhaps  tell  us  that  the  efforts  here  are  too  great 
for  the  causes  that  evoke  them  ;  the  criticism  will  be  just,  but  it  is 
too  general.  In  the  natural  order  of  things  how  many  complicated 
arrangements  do  we  not  see,  how  many  details,  how  many  long  and 
powerful  efforts  to  produce  apparently  trifling  results?  It  is  not  we 
who  created  the  world,  who  presided  over  its  ordering  and  if  things 
are  well  arranged  in  it,  we  must  yet  grant  that  this  arrangement  is 
far  from  simple. 

The  architects  of  the  Middle  Ages  will  admit  a  criticism  that 
might  be  addressed  to  the  great  Orderer  of  the  Universe.  These 
architects,  like  their  predecessors,  had  inert  matter  to  work  upon ; 
they  had  to  submit  to  the  laws  of  attraction  and  resistance  and  to 
take  account  of  the  wind  and  rain.  In  the  presence  of  inert  matter 
and  the  action  of  natural  forces,  they  believed  that  equilibrium  was 
the  true  law  of  construction.  Perhaps  they  deceived  themselves; 
but  it  will  at  least  be  admitted  that  they  deceived  themselves  like 
men  of  genius  and  there  is  always  some  good  to  be  gained  from  men 


258      DEVELOPMENTS   {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 

of  genius,  even  when  they  are  deceived.  Moreover,  it  must  be  con- 
ceded that  the  more  man  seeks  the  more  he  combines  and  compli- 
cates matters  and  the  sooner  he  ascertains  the  weakness  of  his  judg- 
ment. Here  are  rationalists  (if  I  may  use  the  term),  artists  who 
follow  a  principle,  ready  to  accept  anything  in  conformity  with  the 
strictest  rules  of  logic  ;  who  take,  for  building,  fine  stone,  that  is  to 
say,  a  substance  shaped  in  such  a  way  as  to  be  set  in  courses ;  hence 
the  principal  lines  in  their  construction  must  be  horizontal.  But  no ; 
after  half  a  century  of  attempts  of  combinations,  each  more  ingenious 
than  the  preceding,  they  come,  on  the  contrary,  to  making  the  verti- 
cal line  predominate,  in  their  edifices,  over  the  horizontal  and  that 
too  without  ceasing  for  an  instant  to  follow  the  consequences  of  the 
true  principle,  which  they  have  laid  down.  Many  causes  conduce 
to  that  result.  We  have  mentioned  some,  as,  for  instance,  the  utility 
of  stones  set  upright  to  make  buildings  rigid,  or  the  necessity  of 
weighting  the  points  of  support  liable  to  be  forced  out  of  their  verti- 
cal by  oblique  thrusts.  There  is  a  last  point  which  has  its  impor- 
tance :  in  the  cities  of  ihe  Middle  Ages  space  was  limited.  Every 
city,  because  of  the  feudal  system,  was  fortified  and  they  could  not 
move  the  fortifications  of  a  city  every  ten  years;  hence  it  was 
necessary  to  enclose  the  monuments  in  narrow  spaces  and  to  take 
up  as  little  room  as  possible. 

Now,  if  you  build  by  a  principle  which  makes  all  the  actions  of 
your  structure  oblique  and  if  you  cannot  take  more  space,  you  must 
make  up  by  vertical  weights  for  the  room  which  you  lack  on  the 
surface. 

A  law  originally  imposed  by  necessity  and  endured  as  such,  soon 
becomes  a  habit  and  a  need ;  so  much  so  that  even  when  one  could 
get  rid  of  it,  he  submits  to  it,  it  becomes  pleasant  and  enters  into 
his  customs. 

From  the  time  that  the  architects  of  the  Middle  Ages  learned 
that  the  structure  of  their  vaulted  buildings  required  them  to  mul- 
tiply the  vertical  weights  so  as  to  resist  all  oblique  pressure,  they 


CONSTRUCTION. 


259 


freely  accepted  the  situation  and,  as  in  an  edifice,  either  the  horizon- 
tal line  must  necessarily  prevail  over  the  vertical,  or  the  latter  over 
the  horizontal,  unless  they  wished  to  have  a  real  checker-board  pat- 
tern, they  ended  by  suppressing  the  horizontal  line  almost  entirely, 
keeping  it  only  to  indicate  the  level  of  the  stories,  to  show  a  resting- 
place  within,  or  a  floor.  Also,  carrying  their  principles  always 
farther  and  farther,  the  master-workmen,  at  the  end  of  the  thirteenth 
century,  show  clearly,  on  the  outside  of  their  edifices,  the  interior 
arrangement  and  in  this  we  should  do  well  to  imitate  them.  If  we 
examine  the  outside  of  a  Gothic  building  we  can  say  whether  it  is 
vaulted  in  stone  or  roofed  with  timbers.1 

Its  pinnacles  indicate  to  us  the  number  of  its  interior  supports; 
its  bands,  the  levelling-stones  above  the  vaults ;  the  strength  of  its 
buttresses,  the  force  of  the  thrusts  and  their  direction  ;  its  win- 
dows, the  number  of  wall-arches  and  compartments  ;  the  shape  of 
the  roof,  the  perimeter  of  the  various  halls,  etc. 

At  St.  Urbain  of  Troves,  already,  the  different  members  of  the 
structure  are  so  delicate  and  they  have  each  a  function  so  clear  and 
independent,  that  the  architect  assembles  them,  but  does  not  bind 
them  together.  He  places  them  one  beside  another,  keeps  them  to- 
gether by  mortising  and  fitting  them  in,  as  in  joining;  but  he  avoids 
binding  them,  for  this  produces  homogeneity  of  all  the  parts  and 
this  the  builder  fears  in  using  a  system  where  every  part  of  the 
structure  acts,  resists,  —  has  its  own  action  and  resistance,  — an  action 
and  resistance  which  can  be  effective  only  so  far  as  they  are  inde- 
pendent. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  fourteenth  century  this  system  of  allowing 
to  each  member  in  French  construction  its  own  function  and  of 

1  In  this  regard  and  to  show  how  far  opinions  upon  architecture  are  false  to- 
day, we  shall  here  quote  the  opinion  of  a  man,  otherwise  very  enlightened,  who, 
seeing  the  outer  buttresses  indicated  in  a  plan,  wished  to  have  the  architect 
suppress  them,  for  the  reason  that  tli e  progress  of  construction  ought  to  do  away 
with  these  appendages,  applied  to  buildings  in  barbaric  ages  and  showing  noth- 
ing but  ignorance,  etc.  One  might  as  well  say  that  we  are  too  civilized  to  be 
truthful  and  that  falsehood  is  the  most  certain  mark  of  progress. 


260    DEVELOPMENTS  {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 

uniting  these  members  in  accordance  with  the  individual  function  of 
each,  is  carried  to  exaggeration.  This  is  very  evident  in  a  highly 
interesting  monument,  built  from  1320  to  1330;  we  refer  to  the  choir 
of  the  church  of  St.  Nazaire  at  Carcassonne,  one  of  the  rare  original 
conceptions  of  a  period  during  which  the  art  of  architecture  had 
already  fallen  into  the  use  of  formulas  and  cast  aside  every  new  at- 
tempt, every  individual  expression. 

The  careful  examination  and  analysis  of  this  monument  have  re- 
vealed a  fact  interesting  to  us  to-day  :  it  is  the  simple  method  fol- 
lowed by  the  architect  and  his  subordinates  for  building  a  structure 
seemingly  very  intricate  and  apparently  requiring  a  fabulous  num- 
ber of  operations  and  drawings.  In  reality  the  difficulties  of  arrange- 
ment do  not  exist.  This  structure  is  merely  a  collection  of  vertical 
planes,  whose  horizontal  projections  need  only  a  simple  drawing  each. 
It  must  be  admitted  and  well  understood,  first  of  all,  that  the  archi- 
tect knows  what  he  wants,  —  that  he  actually  sees  his  building,  under 
all  its  aspects,  before  laying  the  foundations  ;  that  he  has  looked  out 
for  all  the  different  parts  of  his  construction  ;  that  he  has  done,  be- 
fore cutting  the  first  stone,  all  the  work,  that  w^e  do  upon  an  edifice 
when  measuring  and  studying  its  final  details. 

Gothic  architecture  is  exacting  upon  this  point  and  perhaps  this 
is  what  brings  it  most  of  its  enemies.  It  is  so  consoling  to  say,  when 
a  difficulty  meets  us  on  the  spot,  "  We  shall  see  about  that  when  we 
come  to  the  plastering."  It  is  so  painful,  when  everything  is  not  pro- 
vided for  in  advance,  to  listen  every  day  to  a  long  series  of  questions 
from  the  stone-cutter  or  the  overseer,  —  questions  which  must  be 
answered  clearly  and  simply,  as  by  a  man  who  knows  what  he  is  going 
to  do  and  has  foreseen  everything  that  can  possibly  be  required ! 

Accordingly  the  architect  of  the  choir  of  St.  Nazaire  at  Carcas- 
sonne made  not  only  the  plan  of  his  edifice,  not  only  the  elevations 
and  cross-sections,  but  he  knew  beforehand  the  exact  point  where 
the  various  arches  spring,  meet  and  intersect ;  he  drew  their  profiles 
and  knew  exactly  upon  what  they  were  to  rest;  he  knew  the  results 


CONSTR  UCTION. 


261 


of  the  thrusts,  their  direction  and  their  force  ;  he  estimated  the 
weights  and  reduced  the  pressures  and  the  resistances  to  their  most 
exact  limits.  He  knew  all  this  beforehand  and  he  must  have  known 
it  from  the  time  when  the  first  course  was  placed  above  ground. 

His  conception  being  thus  complete,  fixed  on  paper  and  in  his  brain, 
his  subordinates  go  blindly  forward.    He  says  to  one  :    "  Here  is 


Fig.  I  09.    Choir  and  Transept  of  St.  Nazaire,  Carcassonne. 


the  design  of  the  pier  A,  repeated  twice  ;  this  is  the  design  of  the 
buttress  C,  repeated  ten  times,  etc.;  here  is  the  drawing  of  the  win- 
dow A,  repeated  six  times  and  of  the  window  B,  repeated  seven 
times ;  here  is  a  branch  of  a  diagonal  arch  with  its  stones  of  impost, 
of  a  transverse  arch  with  its  imposts,  etc."  This  being  said,  the 
architect  can  go  away  and  let  all  the  courses  and  the  parts  of  each 
member  be  cut  out.     The  cutting  finished,  a  master-setter  comes, 


262   DEVELOPMENTS    {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 


who,  without  possible  mistake,  has  all  these  different  pieces  taken  up 
and  put  into  their  places,  like  the  pieces  of  a  well-planned  machine. 
This  mode  of  procedure  explained  how,  at  this  period  (at  the  end 
of  the  thirteenth  century  and  during  the  fourteenth  century),  French 
architects  had  monuments  erected  in  countries  where,  perhaps,  they 
had  never  set  foot;  how  from  Spain,  from  the  south  of  France,  from 
Hungary  and  from  Bohemia,  requests  came  for  designs  of  monu- 
ments by  these  architects ;  and  how  these  monuments  could  be  built 
and  exactly  resemble,  save  in  some  details  of  profile  and  sculpture, 
the  edifices  built  between  the  Somme  and  the  Loire. 

The  choir  of  the  church  of  St.  Nazaire  at  Carcassonne  was  prob- 
ably erected  thus,  with  the  aid  of  plans  furnished  by  an  architect  of 
the  north,  who  perhaps  scarcely  visited  the  city. 

Our  reason  for  this  opinion  is  that,  evidently,  the  architect  has 
avoided  every  difficulty  requiring  a  decision  on  the  spot ;  those  diffi- 
culties which  one  solves,  not  by  a  design,  but  by  explanations  given 
to  the  stone-cutters  and  workmen  in  the  very  work-yard  while  watch- 
ing their  work  and  taking,  if  necessary,  the  gauge,  the  rule,  or  the 
square  and  applying  it  to  the  design.  The  architect,  for  instance, 
has  almost  entirely,  in  the  vaults  of  this  edifice,  given  up  imposts 
common  to  several  arches ;  he  has  given  the  curve  of  each  of  these 
arches  and  their  profiles ;  each  has  been  cut  without  regard  to  the 
adjoining  arch  and  the  master-setter  has  arranged  all  this  like  a 
game  of  patience.  But  in  order  that  the  singular  method  of 
construction  used  in  the  choir  of  the  church  of  St.  Nazaire  at  Car- 
cassonne may  be  appreciated,  it  is  best  to  give,  first,  half  of  the 
plan  of  this  choir  with  its  transept  (Fig.  109). 

We  see  in  this  plan  the  horizontal  projection  of  the  vaults;  they 
have  all  their  keys  on  the  same  level,  or  nearly  so,  although  their 
dimensions  and  forms  are  not  alike ;  so,  necessarily,  the  springings 
of  these  arches  are  found  on  very  different  levels. 

We  must  also  see  the  general  section  of  this  building  through  A  B. 
The  architect  had  thought  of  closing  the  vaults  C  (Fig.  110)  at  a 


CONSTRUCTION. 


263 


Fig.  I  10-    Transept  Arch,  St.  Nazaire,  Carcassonne. 


264  DEVELOPMENTS   {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 

level  below  that  of  the  great  vaults  of  the  chancel  and  of  the  tran- 
sept; and  the  structure  had  been  so  built  up  above  the  springing  of 
these  low  vaults,  as  seen  by  the  dotted  lines  D  E. 

But  the  architect  had  to  yield  to  the  desire  for  greater  effect,  by 
raising  the  keys  of  all  the  vaults  to  the  same  level.  Perhaps  a  re- 
quirement from  the  clergy  caused  the  adoption  of  this  latter  course ; 
but  certain  it  is  that  the  low  starting-points,  indicated  by  dots,  were 
cut  off  at  the  surface  of  the  piers,  as  can  be  easily  seen  and  that 
these  springings  were  raised,  as  indicated  in  our  drawing,  in  order 
to  have  through  the  whole  extent  of  the  edifice  windows  of  equal 
height. 

Figure  111  gives  a  section  through  the  line  G  H  of  the  plan. 

Let  us  at  once  notice,  that,  to  hinder  the  buckling  of  these  slender 
piers,  subjected  to  the  unequal  thrusts  produced  by  the  elevation  of 
the  secondary  vaults,  the  architect  has  fixed  bars  of  iron,  /,  0.05 
centimetres  square,  to  be  seen  in  our  two  sections  and  that  the 
stone  used  is  a  hard  and  resistant  limestone,  which  permitted  them 
to  place  the  vaults  upon  these  slender  supports. 

Let  us  now  examine  with  care  the  details  of  this  structure ;  let  us 
take  the  summit  of  the  pier  K  (of  the  plan)  at  the  point  where  that 
pier  receives  a  large  intermediate  transverse  arch  of  the  chancel, 
two  archivolts,  a  transverse  arch  of  the  chapel  and  two  branches  of 
diagonal  arches. 

The  horizontal  section  of  this  pier  (Fig.  112)  is  drawn  at  A. 

From  B  to  C  we  see  four  courses  of  stones  to  receive  the  large 
transverse  arch. 

Starting  from  the  section  C,  normal  to  the  curve  of  the  transverse 
arch  E,  the  voussoirs  of  that  arch  are  independent  and  the  pier  rises 
behind  the  filling  F  of  that  arch,  without  being  attached  to  it,  up  to 
the  capital  of  the  wall-arch  G.  The  projection  of  this  capital  forms 
a  connection  with  the  filling  and  then  the  pier  rises,  again  inde- 
pendent, up  to  its  meeting  with  the  wall-arch  H. 

Above  the  capital,  6r,  the  filling  rises  vertically  from  /  to  K.  It 


Fig.  III.    Choir  Arch,  St.  Nazaire,  Carcassonne. 


266    DEVELOPMENTS  {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 


Fig.  I  I  2.    Choir  Pier,  St.  Nazaire,  Carcassonne. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


267 


is  pierced  by  a  trefoil,  L,  which  ornaments  the  bareness  of  this  tri- 
angle, receiving  the  vaultings  of  cut-stones. 

The  two  bars  of  iron  M  serve  as  ties  between  this  pier  and  the 
one  adjoining  and  maintain  the  thrust  of  the  transverse  arch  E. 

Let  us  take  the  adjoining  pier  L  of  the  plan,  that  of  the  entering 
angle,  which  is  located  between  three  windows  and  which  receives  a 
large  transverse  arch,  two  branches  of  the  great  diagonal  arches  of 
the  principal  vaults  and  a  third  branch  of  a  diagonal  arch  from  the 
chapel  (Fig.  113).  It  is  again  seen  that  here  the  drawing  of  each 
part  has  been  made  independently  of  the  rest  and  that  the  arrange- 
ment shows  only  the  fewest  possible  connections,  in  order  to  avoid 
too  complicated  designs.  This  independence  of  the  different  mem- 
bers of  the  vaults,  in  falling  upon  the  piers,  allows  great  elasticity  to 
the  structure,  —  an  elasticity  necessary  in  a  monument  so  light,  very 
high  and  very  unevenly  weighted.  It  can,  in  fact,  be  affirmed,  that 
in  the  choir  of  the  church  of  St.  Nazaire  there  have  been  torsions 
and  considerable  movements,  without  in  this  way  destroying  any  of 
the  solidity  of  the  building. 

Once  more,  these  are  not  examples  to  follow,  but  useful  ones  to 
know,  because  of  the  simple  and  practical  means  put  in  operation. 

In  Figure  114  we  see  the  outer  side  of  the  same  pier.  We  are 
placed  in  the  angle  of  the  chapel,  at  the  point  V  of  the  plan ;  we 
suppose  the  upper  mullions  of  the  great  window  of  this  chapel  to  be 
taken  away.1 

At  A  is  seen  the  bar  of  iron  which  maintains  the  tops  of  the 
pillars  of  these  mullions  and  which  serves  at  the  same  time  as  a  tie 
for  the  springing  of  these  arches  [see  "Meneau  "  ]  ;  at  B,  the  groove 
reserved  for  setting  the  open-work  centering  of  the  mullions ;  at  C, 
the  stones  of  impost  of  the  wall-arch  that  encloses  the  window-frame 
of  cut-stone ;  at  E,  the  branch  of  the  diagonal  arch  of  the  chapel- 
vault,  whose  courses  of  impost  are  mingled  with  those  of  the  wall-arch. 

iThis  operation  having  taken  place  under  our  eyes,  we  have  been  able  to 
ascertain  very  exactly  and  here  reproduce  that  construction. 


268    DEVELOPMENTS  {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 


Starting  from  the  bed  D,  the  voussoirs  of  that  diagonal  arch  are 
independent. 

At  G  is  the  archivolt  surrounding  the  carved  open-work  center- 
ing of  the  first  window  in  the  chancel  and  filling  the  place  of 


Fig.  I  I  3.    Choir  and  Chapel  Pier,  St.  Nazaire,  Carcassone. 


wall-arch  of  the  interior ,  at  F  the  archivolt  wall-arch  of  the  mul- 
lions  without  glass,  separating  the  chapel  from  the  choir.  Here  it 
will  be  observed  that  this  arch  F  is  moulded  even  in  the  part  hidden 


CONSTRUCTION. 


269 


by  the  masonry  of  the  entering  angle  behind  the  diagonal  arch  E, 
which  proves  in  the  clearest  manner  that  each  member  of  the 
structure  was  separately  outlined  and  cut  in  the  work-yard  after 
detail  designs  and  that  these  different  parts  thus  prepared  by  the 
stonecutter  were  put  into  place  by  the  setter,  who  alone  knew  each 
of  their  functions  and  their  relations  with  the  whole  of  the  structure. 

The  mason  filled  the  gaps  remaining  between  these  interlacing, 
interpenetrating  members,  all  remaining  free. 

We  have  drawn  at  K  the  horizontal  projection  of  that  entering 
angle,  with  the  intersection  of  the  two  archivolt-wall-arches  G. 

Such  a  structure  consists  only  of  piers  holding  elastic  but  resist- 
ant groins,  supporting  the  fillings  of  the  vaults,  or  maintaining  the 
sashes  of  stone  in  the  large  grooves. 

It  shows  us  that  the  master-builder  could  leave  nothing  to  chance, 
postpone  nothing  ;  that  he  could  foresee  everything  from  the  first 
course,  classify  his  designs  methodically  and  that  he  needed,  when 
once  the  stone  was  cut  according  to  the  designs  and  the  pieces  ready, 
only  to  give  instructions  to  a  skilful  stone-layer,  who  took  succes- 
sively all  the  parts  of  the  structure  and  put  them  in  order  into  their 
places,  as  the  master-carpenter  takes,  one  by  one,  the  pieces  of 
timber,  cut  in  advance,  in  order  to  raise  them  to  their  places. 

To-day  people  proceed  otherwise :  they  collect  the  blocks  of 
stone,  often  without  knowing  very  definitely  what  form  they  will 
finally  take  and  they  cut  in  these  same  blocks  the  intersections  of 
the  voussoirs  and  the  mouldings,  as  one  might  do  in  a  homogeneous 
mass,  without  very  much  anxiety  about  the  beds  and  joints  that  fail 
to  coincide  with  the  given  forms.  Is  this  better?  Is  this  the 
means  of  obtaining  a  more  solid  structure?  We  beg  leave  to  doubt. 
We  can  affirm,  on  the  contrary,  that  it  is  less  reasonable,  less  skilful, 
less  intelligent  and  more  costly.  - 

There  is  no  religious  construction  of  the  Middle  Ages  more 
advanced  than  that  of  the  churches  of  St.  Urbain  of  Troyes  and 
St.  Nazaire  of  Carcassonne,  in  the  path  opened  by  the  architects  of 


270      DEVELOPMENTS    (THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 


Fig.  I  14. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


271 


the  thirteenth  century.  They  could  not,  in  truth,  go  farther  with- 
out substituting  metal  for  stone. 

It  is  doubtful  whether  the  architects  of  the  fourteenth  century  were 
checked  by  that  impossibility,  or  whether  their  fruitless  efforts  had 
proved  to  them  that  they  had  already  passed  the  limits  imposed  by 
matter:  in  any  case  a  reaction  took  place  about  1330  and  the 
builders  abandoned  these  too-bold  methods  to  return  to  a  wiser 
system.  But  this  reaction  ended  by  destroying  originality ;  they 
came  to  formulas.  At  that  period  we  see  the  builders  casting  aside, 
in  the  vital  parts  of  their  structures,  that  simultaneous  use  of  stones 
set  upon  their  bed  and  against  the  stratum,  which  had  furnished 
the  builders  of  the  thirteenth  century  with  such  beautiful  subjects 
for  decoration.  They  keep  the  forms  prescribed  by  this  system, 
but  no  longer  appreciate  the  reason  for  them  and,  losing  something 
of  the  adventurous  spirit  of  their  predecessors,  they  give  up  the 
stones  set  against  the  stratum  as  a  means  of  rigidity  for  the  sup- 
ports and  return  to  structures  built  in  courses,  reserving  the  stones 
set  against  the  stratum  for  mullions  and  inlaid  arching, —  that  is,  for 
the  architectural  members  supporting  no  weight  and  serving  only 
as  /window-sashes  or  decorations.  Still,  as  if  to  follow,  in  appear- 
ance at  least,  the  consequences  of  the  system  devised  during  the 
thirteenth  century,  they  multiply  the  vertical  lines  and  wish  that 
not  only  the  members  of  the  vaults,  the  arches,  shall  have  each  its  point 
of  support,  but  even  the  mouldings  with  which  these  arches  are  orna- 
mented. Hence  there  results  between  the  form  given  to  the  piers, 
for  instance  and  the  construction  of  these  piers,  the  most  evident 
contradiction.  In  fact,  the  builders  of  the  fourteenth  century  return 
to  heavier  forms,  although  they  try  to  disguise  that  reaction  under 
an  apparent  lightness,  by  multiplying  the  slender  members  of  the 
architecture.  As  workmen  they  are  very  clever,  very  prudent, 
experienced  and  skilful,  but  they  entirely  lack  invention.  They 
have  no  more  of  that  boldness  which  indicates  genius.  They  are 
wiser  than  their  predecessors  of  the  thirteenth  century,  but  they 


272    DEVELOPMENTS  {THIRTEENTH  CENTURY). 

have  the  defects  which  often  accompany  wisdom  ;  their  sure  methods, 
their  formulas,  are  stamped,  despite  all  their  efforts,  with  a  weari- 
some monotony. 

One  of  the  most  striking  and  most  complete  examples  of  religious 
construction  in  the  fourteenth  century  is  the  Cathedral  of  Narbonne, 
whose  choir  only  was  built  from  1370  to  1400. 1 

It  is  the  work  of  a  consummate  master  of  the  art,  though  lacking 
in  that  imagination,  those  unexpected  resources  which  charm  us  in 
the  constructions  of  the  thirteenth  century  and  which  lend  them- 
selves to  the  most  varied  conceptions. 

What  gives  the  architects  of  the  fourteenth  century  this  degree 
of  practical  skill  was  that  repairing  of  the  lower  structures,  those 
partial  reconstructions  made  in  the  older  edifices.  At  this  period 
the  materials  used  are  always  of  the  first  quality,  the  design  learned, 
the  arrangement  excellent  and  the  cutting  executed  with  remarkable 
care.  Otherwise  the  general  system  of  construction  is  modified  very 
little,  but  is  applied  with  more  sureness  and  with  perfect  knowledge 
of  active  and  passive  forces,  of  thrusts  and  weights.  The  flying- 
buttresses,  for  example,  are  well  drawn  and  set  just  where  they 
ought  to  be.  We  have  a  very  clear  proof  of  this  in  the  Cathedral 
of  Paris.  All  the  flying-buttresses  of  the  nave  and  of  the  choir  were 
rebuilt  at  this  period  (toward  1330),  and  rebuilt  so  as  to  clear  the 
galleries  above  the  aisle  and  fall  upon  the  large  outer  piers  [see 
" Arc-Boutant"  Fig.  59,  "Cathedrale  "J. 

These  flying-buttresses,  which  have  a  very  long  radius  and  hence 

a  curve  very  slightly  marked,  have  been  calculated  with  an  exact 

knowledge  of  the  function  they  had  to  fulfil  and  when  we  reflect 

that  they  had  to  be  rebuilt  under  new  conditions  and  resting  upon 

old  structures,  we  are  obliged  to  recognize  in  these  builders  of  the 

fourteenth  century  a  great  experience  and  an  uncommon  skill. 

1  It  should  be  said  that  in  France  we  have  not  a  single  large  edifice  complete, 
in  the  architecture  of  the  fourteenth  century.  The  thirteenth  had  left  no  great 
monuments  of  this  class  to  be  built  and  the  fourteenth  could  only  finish  edifices 
already  begun,  -while  they  had  no  leisure  to  finish  the  small  number  founded  by 
themselves. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


273 


We  do  not  believe  that  we  need  continue  longer  upon  the  religious 
constructions  of  the  Middle  Ages,  for  we  shall  teach  our  readers 
nothing  new,  after  what  we  have  already  said. 

The  articles  in  the  "Dlctionnaire  "  state  elsewhere  the  differences 
resulting  from  the  improvements  in  detail,  added  by  the  architects  of 
the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth  centuries,  in  religious  constructions. 

We  shall  now  devote  ourselves  to  the  civil  and  military  construc- 
tions, which  proceed  after  their  special  methods  and  have  but  little 
relation  to  the  construction  of  edifices  purely  religious. 


4 


CHAPTER  IX. 


Civil  Construction. 

IN  the  early  part  of  the  Middle  Ages  the  Roman  traditions  had 
perpetuated  themselves  on  Gallic  soil  in  civil  as  well  as  in  military 
constructions ;  nevertheless,  wood  played  a  more  important  role 
than  during  the  Gallo-Roman  period.  The  Gallo-Roman  system  of 
construction  does  not  differ  from  the  Roman  system ;  the  same  methods 
are  employed,  but  more  coarsely,  so  far  as  the  execution  is  concerned. 
During  the  Merovingian  period  one  meets  with  very  frequent  employ- 
ment of  wood,  not  only  for  roofs,  but  in  ceilings,  wainscots,  porches, 
even  the  walls  of  dwellings.  Germany  and  the  Gauls  produced 
timber  in  profusion  and  this  material  being  easily  employed  it  was 
natural  to  use  it  in  preference  to  stone  or  brick  which  take  time  and 
require  difficult  quarrying,  dressing,  laborious  transportation  or 
previous  burning.1 

The  conflagrations  which  destroyed  so  many  towns  and  villages 

*It  is  only  toward  the  end  of  the  thirteenth  century  that  the  forests  of  the 
Gauls  began  to  diminish  in  extent  and  in  quality,  that  is  to  say  from  the  moment 
when  the  feudal  organization  began  to  grow  weak.  During  the  fourteenth 
century  many  feudal  lords  were  obliged  to  dispose  of  part  of  their  property  and 
the  monastic  establishments,  the  chapter-houses  or  the  parishes  cut  down  a  not- 
able portion  of  the  forests  of  which  they  had  become  possessors.  Subsequent  to 
the  wars  of  the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth  centuries,  the  forests  in  many  localities, 
no  longer  being  under  the  beneficial  administration  of  the  feudal  system,  were 
cruelly  devastated.  Those  which  existed  on  the  mountains  were  thus  lost  for- 
ever in  consequence  of  the  washing-away  of  the  soil  from  the  steep  slopes.  It  is 
thus  that  the  south  and  all  the  centre  of  France  at  present  are  despoiled  of  the 
forests  which  once  garnished  the  plateaus,  whose  existence  is  still  noted  up  to 
the  end  of  the  thirteenth  century. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


275 


during  the  ninth,  tenth  and  eleventh  centuries  helped  to  bring  about 
the  abandonment  of  wood  in  the  construction  of  private  dwellings  as 
well  as  of  churches.  This  material  was  no  longer  employed  except 
for  flooring,  roofing  and  the  partitions  of  dwellings.  Already  in  the 
twelfth  century,  a  number  of  towns  showed  facades  of  houses  in 
dressed-stone  or  in  rubble-work  —  leaving  out  of  account  certain 
regions  deprived  of  quarries,  like  Champagne  and  Picardy,  for 
example. 

The  monastic  establishments,  so  wealthy  in  the  twelfth  century, 
set  the  example  of  civil  constructions  in  stone  and  this  example  was 
followed  by  private  individuals.  It  must  be  said  to  the  honor  of  the 
builders  of  this  epoch  that  in  adopting  ashlar  or  rubble  in  place  of 
wood,  they  very  frankly  took  a  mode  of  construction  suitable  for 
these  materials  and  did  not  attempt  while  using  them  to  reproduce 
forms  or  arrangements  which  were  suitable  for  timber  construction. 

Always  disposed  to  preserve  its  real  function  and  the  appearance 
befitting  it,  for  the  material  employed,  they  did  not  attempt  in  the 
least  to  dissimulate  the  nature  of  the  materials.  The  means  employed 
were,  nevertheless,  of  an  extreme  simplicity  and  those  artists  who  in 
their  ecclesiastical  constructions  from  the  twelfth  century  onwards 
showed  a  singular  subtilty,  research  and  used  such  complicated 
methods,  contented  themselves  in  civil  buildings  with  the  most  natu- 
ral and  the  least  complicated.  Economical  of  materials,  which  then 
cost  comparatively  more  than  to-day,  their  dwellings  are  during  the 
twelfth  and  thirteenth  centuries  reduced  to  what  is  strictly  necessary, 
without  pretending  to  appear  anything  more  or  different  from  what 
they  really  are,  that  is  to  say,  walls,  pierced  with  openings,  carrying 
floors  formed  of  exposed  beams  and  joists,  well  sheltered  on  the 
street  and  court-yard  fronts  by  projecting  roofs,  throwing  the  water 
well  away  from  the  faces.  Very  rarely,  unless  it  may  be  in  a  few 
towns  of  the  south  and  centre,  the  ground-floors  were  vaulted,  con- 
sequently there  were  no  buttresses,  no  projections  on  the  exterior. 
Most  frequently  the  walls  are  in  exposed  scappled  rubble-work  with 


Fig.  115.    A  House  at  Cluny. 

the  occasional  belt-courses,  the  jambs  and  the  lintels  of  doors  and 
windows  of  cut-stone;  still  these  lintels  and  these  jambs  are  not 


CONSTRUCTION. 


277 


bonded  but  are  simply  facings  on  the  outside ;  —  the  belt-courses 
alone  bond  together  the  interior  and  exterior  surfaces  of  the  walls. 

In  order  to  give  an  idea  of  the  commonest  sort  of  civil  construc- 
tions of  the  twelfth  and  of  the  beginning  of  the  thirteenth  centuries 
and  of  the  simplicity  of  the  means  employed,  we  shall  choose  from  a 
great  number  of  examples  one  of  the  houses  of  the  town  of  Cluny, 
so  rich  in  Mediaeval  dwellings.  Figure  115  shows  the  face  of  the 
exterior  wall  of  this  house  on  the  street  side.  It  is  simply  a  rubble 
construction  with  a  few  cut  stones  for  the  belt-courses,  the  arches, 
the  windows  and  their  lintels.  The  first  row  arches  open  into  the 
shops.  At  the  right  is  the  door  to  the  alley  which  leads  to  the  stair- 
case.   The  second  story  shows  an  open  gallery  composed  of  uprights 


% 

Fig.  I  16. 

and  colonnettes  lighting  the  large  room.  The  window  openings  are 
square  so  as  to  receive  movable  sashes.  In  the  lintels  underneath 
the  arches  carrying  the  third-story  wall  are  pierced  small  windows 
with  sashes.  The  third  story  is  lighted  by  a  less  important  open- 
ing and  strongly  projecting  roofs  throw  the  water  away  from  the 
outside  walls. 

In  plan  the  second  story  gives  Figure  116,  and  Figure  11 7  reproduces 
the  front  wall  seen  from  the  inside  with  its  relieving  arches  above 
the  lintels  of  the  second  story,  the  seats  in  the  windows  and  the 
supports  of  the  girders  sustaining  the  joists.  These  principal 
girders  placed  along  the  front  wall  between  the  arches  bond  together 
the  two  parallel  walls  of  the  house  and  act  as  anchors.    These  were 


278 


CIVIL  CONSTRUCTION. 


Fig.  I  I  7.    Interior  View  of  Front  shown  in  Figure  I  I  5. 

upheld' at  the  ends  by  wood  corbels  as  shown  in  the  section  Figure 
118  [see  "Maison" '].    That  is  the  simplest  expression  of  private 


CONSTRUCTION. 


279 


Fig.  I  I  8.    Section  of  Figure  I  I  5. 


architecture  during  the  Middle 
Ages ;  but  civil  construction  did 
not  always  have  such  an  ingenu- 
ous  character.     In   the  great 
dwellings,  in  the  chateaux,  the 
arrangements  being  much  more 
complicated  and   the  dwellers 
very  numerous,  it  was  necessary 
to  provide  interior  divisions  and 
separations;  nevertheless,  there 
are  certain  general  dispositions 
which  remained  the  same  for  the 
lordly  habitations  as  for  those 
of  the  citizen.    It  was  always 
necessary  to  have  the  hall, 
the  place  of  reunion  of  the 
family  of  the  citizen  or  the 
maisnee1  or   household,  in 
the  case  of  the  seigneur,  then  the 
chambers  with  their  closets 
and  their  retiring-rooms  and  the 
passage-ways  to  reach  these 
apartments,  with  private  stair- 
cases.   There  were,  then,  under 
the  same  roof,  some  very  large 
apartments   and    others  very 
small,  corridors,  with  air  and  day- 
light everywhere.    It  has  been 
imagined  very  wrongly  that  the 
seignorial  dwellings,  as  well  as 
those  of  the   citizen   in  the 
Middle  Ages,  could  not  have  been 
other  than  gloomy  and  sombre, 


1The  Maisnee,  that  is  to  say  the  household,  includes  not  only  the  family  hut 
the  servitors,  the  hired  men  and  women  and  all  the  personnel  of  a  chateau. 


280 


CI  VI L  CONS TR  UC Tl  ON. 


badly  lighted,  badly  ventilated.  This  is  another  of  those  absolute 
judgments  which  one  ought  not  to  make  concerning  this  epoch. 
While  the  necessities  of  defence  forbade  the  seigneurs  piercing  win- 
dow openings  except  at  rare  intervals,  they  nevertheless  sought  in 
their  chateaux  light,  air,  view  of  the  landscape,  an  outlook  in  va- 
rious directions  and  the  sun  and  breeze  at  will.  If  one  will  only 
take  the  trouble  to  reflect  a  moment  he  will  readily  see  that  men 
who  passed  the  greater  part  of  their  existence  in  roaming  over  the 
country-side  would  not  willingly  shut  themselves  up,  sometimes  dur- 
ing weeks  together,  in  gloomy  rooms,  without  outlook,  without  air, 
without  light.  If  the  arrangements  for  the  defence  of  a  residence 
compelled  the  dwellers  in  it  to  get  along  with  as  few  exterior  win- 
dows as  possible,  if  the  court-yards  of  chateaux  surrounded  with 
high  buildings  were  frequently  gloomy  and  dark,  these  dwellers 
nevertheless  sought  in  all  kinds  of  ingenious  ways  to  get  outlooks 
over  the  country-side,  air  and  sunshine.  This  accounts  for  the 
flanking  turrets,  the  watch-towers,  the  battlements,  the  reentrant 
angles  which  permitted  windows  to  be  made,  masked  from  the 
outside. 

Certain  special  arrangements  were  also  imposed  upon  the  archi- 
tects of  the  great  dwelling-houses  by  very  sensible  customs.  It  was 
not  permissible  during  the  Middle  Ages,  any  more  than  during 
antiquity,  to  give  a  large  hall  and  a  small  chamber  the  same  height 
between  joists ;  to  make  a  passage-way  as  lofty  as  the  apartments 
to  which  it  gave  access.  Centuries  of  false  reasoning  in  architecture 
have  been  necessary  to  bring  about  the  neglect  of  such  true  prin- 
ciples and  to  oblige  us  to  live  in  large  low-studded  rooms  if  the  story 
we  occupy  is  low-studded,  or  in  little  unreasonably  high  chambers  if 
we  have  a  story  fifteen  or  twenty  feet  in  the  clear.  In  large  cities 
the  height  of  the  stories  being  governed  by  regulations,  one  can 
understand  how  necessity  has  imposed  conditions  as  inconvenient  as 
they  are  ridiculous.  But  wherever  an  architect  has  free  play,  in  a 
country-house  or  in  a  mansion,  it  is  very  unreasonable  for  him  to 


CONSTRUCTION. 


281 


neglect  to  pay  attention  to  the  superficial  dimensions  of  apartments 
so  as  to  fix  the  height  suitable  to  each  of  them;  to  light  small 
chambers  or  passage-ways  by  windows  having  the  same  dimensions 
as  those  used  for  large  apartments;  to  make  lateral  corridors 
obstruct  all  the  light  from  one  of  the  faces  of  the  building ;  stair- 
cases cut  across  the  middle  of  window  openings ;  mezzanine  stories 
at  the  expense  of  large  windows,  so  that  a  given  architectural  style, 


COUPE 

t>a  Pasatj* 


Fig.  I  I  9. 

which  matters  very  little  to  the  inhabitants  of  a  palace,  may  not  be 
interfered  with ;  or,  still  more,  to  place  corridors  along  the  middle  of 
houses  giving  access  to  the  apartments  to  the  right  and  left,  corri- 
dors lighted  by  borrowed  light,  badly  ventilated,  gloomy,  noisy  as 
an  inn-hallway,  taking  up  valuable  space  and  bringing  a  weight  on 
the  floor-beams  in  their  weakest  part.    The  mediaeval  architects  did 


282 


CIVIL  CONSTRUCTION. 


none  of  these  things  and  did  not  even  imagine  that  they  could  be 
done  and  they  are  certainly  not  the  ones  to  be  censured  for  so  think- 
ing. Their  dwelling-houses  were  almost  always  one  room  in  depth. 
And  in  order  that  the  apartments  into  which  they  were  divided 
transversely  should  not  open  into  one  another,  which  would  have 
been  very  inconvenient  in  most  cases,  they  arranged  lengthwise  of 
these  buildings  low,  covered  galleries,  which  gave  access  to  each 
of  these  apartments  while  still  permitting  windows  to  be  placed 
above  them  (Fig.  119). 

If  the  building  had  several  stories,  this  arrangement  could  still  be 
preserved  with  all  its  advantages  (Fig.  120). 

At  A  is  seen  the  second  story  with  its  gallery,  C,  above  which  are 
the  windows  lighting  the  rooms ;  at  B,  the  upper  story,  almost 
always  open  timbered,  lighted  by  windows  surmounted  by  dormers, 
E,  on  the  side  opposite  to  the  gallery  and  by  dormers  only  above  this 
gallery.  The  passage  for  the  upper  story  is  carried  on  arches,  which 
permit  of  window-openings  between  their  vertical  faces,  lighting 
directly  the  second  story.  Such  an  arrangement  still  exists  at  the 
Palais  de  Justice  at  Paris,  in  the  western  portion ;  it  dates  from  the 
thirteenth  century.  We  cannot  decry  the  reasonableness  and  truth 
shown  in  such  construction,  which  gives  to  each  household  depart- 
ment its  relative  importance,  which  supplies  to  the  principal  apart- 
ments all  the  air  and  light  they  demand  and  which  evidences  very 
clearly  by  the  exterior,  the  interior  uses  and  arrangements  of  the 
structure.  It  is  certainly  more  in  accordance  with  the  good  old 
traditions  of  antiquity  than  is  a  row  of  columns  or  pilasters  planted, 
one  knows  not  why,  against  a  wall.  It  shows  that  while  the 
mediaeval  ecclesiastical  architecture  departed  from  the  ancient 
models,  nevertheless  civil  architecture  was  able  for  a  long  time  to 
preserve  their  spirit.  We  shall  note  more  than  one  proof  of  this. 
When  the  dwellings  are  large  and  the  buildings  are  composed  of 
several  stories,  a  thing  which  the  mediaeval  architects  often  sought, 
for  the  simple  reason  that  two  stories,  one  above  the  other,  cost 


CONSTRUCTION. 


283 


Fig.  I  20. 


284 


CIVIL  CONSTRUCTION. 


less  to  build  than  if  one  undertakes  to  cover  a  superficies  equal  to 
that  of  the  two  stories  on  the  ground -floor,  since  it  is  then  necessary 
to  double  the  foundation  and  the  roof  —  when,  we  say,  the  structures 
contain  several  stories,  the  architect  increases  the  number  of  stair- 
ways so  that  each  apartment  has  its  own.  Nevertheless  there  is 
always  a  principal  flight,  a  staircase  of  honor  which  leads  to  the 
apartments  intended  for  receptions.  During  the  Romanesque  period, 
stairs  of  cut  stone  are  not  common ;  they  were  usually  made  of  timber, 
that  is  to  say  by  superposing  squared  logs,  whose  ends  are  slightly 
let  into  the  lateral  walls ;  later  staircases  were  made  of  two  straight 
flights  with  landings  and  were  included  in  a  rectangular  cage, 
longitudinally  traversed  by  a  bearing-wall  [See  "Escalier"'].  This 
method  was  almost  entirely  abandoned  by  the  constructors  of  the 
thirteenth  century,  who  adopted  spiral  staircases  with  stone  newels 
and  treads  because  they  occupied  less  room  and  gave  easier  access 
to  the  stories  which  were  to  be  reached.  If  these  spiral  staircases 
had  a  very  small  diameter,  say  five  feet  in  the  clear,  they  were  fre- 
quently built  in  the  thickness  of  the  walls,  forming  a  slight  projection 
on  the  outside  rather  than  on  the  inside ;  if,  on  the  contrary,  they 
occupied  a  cylindrical  or  polygonal  cage  of  considerable  diameter  in 
the  clear,  say  eight  or  ten  feet,  they  projected  entirely  on  the 
exterior  and  did  not  interfere  with  the  internal  arrangements.  As 
for  the  separate  buildings,  each  possessed  its  own  roof  and  if  the 
structures  were  of  double  extent,  there  was  a  roof  over  each  portion 
with  an  intermediate  gutter.  The  mediaeval  architects  having  felt 
compelled  to  adopt  roofs  whose  slope  was  more  than  45°  and  having 
no  conception  of  gambrel  roofs  could  not  understand  a  structure  of 
double  extent  under  one  single  roof,  for  this  roof  would  then  have 
reached  an  enormous  dimension  as  far  as  the  height  is  concerned. 
It  was  easy  to  place,  if  need  be,  roofs  at  different  levels  on  every 
detached  building,  every  pavilion,  every  staircase,  possessing  its  own 
roof,  whether  pyramidal,  lean-to,  gabled  or  hipped  and  thus  to  obtain 
stories  high  between  joists  when  they  were  large,  or  low  when  they 


CONSTRUCTION. 


285 


were  small.  This  method  used  a  great  deal  of  wood  and  roof-surface 
and  required  lead-lined  gutters,  but  it  had  this  advantage  Over  that 
which  consists  in  enveloping  all  the  parts  of  a  building  under  one 
roof,  viz,  that  it  furnished  to  architects  various  resources  in  respect 
to  giving  height  to  stories,  of  permitting  them  to  open  a  large 
number  of  dormers,  to  illuminate  the  upper  stories,  of  detaching  the 
staircase  roof  from  the  main  roof,  thus  providing  lookouts  above 
the  eaves  and  acting  as  ventilators  for  the  lower  stories.  Seen  from 
a  distance  these  distinct  roofs  covering  groups  of  connected  build- 
ings, indicating  their  form  and  their  purpose,  were  very  picturesque 
and  gave  to  large  dwellings  the  appearance  of  a  collection  of  houses 
of  greater  or  less  extent  and  height  according  to  their  various  uses. 

It  is  easy  to  be  seen  that  this  construction  differed  at  all  points 
from  that  of  our  own  times  and  it  should  be  remarked  that  these 
traditions  preserved  their  force  until  toward  the  middle  of  the  seven- 
teenth century.  In  principle  if  not  in  form  we  note  in  these  arrange- 
ments the  trace  of  the  great  dwellings  of  antiquity,  the  villce,  which 
were  in  truth  nothing  but  groups  of  buildings  more  or  less  connected, 
but  distinct  in  form,  in  height  and  in  roofing.  Careless  of  the 
laws  of  symmetry  the  mediaeval  architects  placed  the  different 
departments  of  the  large  dwellings  anywhere  according  to  orienta- 
tion, with  due  regard  to  the  needs  of  the  dwellers  and  conformably 
to  the  configuration  of  the  ground.  This  furnishes  another  point  of 
resemblance  to  the  antique  villce  which  in  their  ensemble  had  nothing 
symmetrical.  In  the  cities  which  were  almost  all  fortified  at  that 
time,  ground  was  as  rare  as  it  was  in  the  fortified  towns.  In  the 
chateaux  whose  perimeter  was  always  limited  as  much  by  motives  of 
economy  as  by  the  necessity  of  defending  it  by  a  small  garrison, 
every  foot  of  space  was  utilized.  Consequently  the  architects  had 
to  endeavor  in  town  as  well  as  in  the  country  to  accommodate  as 
many  household  needs  as  possible  in  a  relatively  small  space.  In 
this  regard  the  mediajval  civil  constructions  differ  from  those  of  the 
ancients;  the  latter  in  their  villce  scarcely  built  higher  than  one 


286 


CIVIL  CONSTRUCTION. 


story  and  occupied  considerable  ground.  Obliged  to  confine  them- 
selves within  restricted  limits,  the  architects  of  the  Middle  Ages 
were  compelled  to  adopt  interior  arrangements  differing  likewise 
from  those  employed  by  the  Romans;  to  accommodate  various  kinds 
of  work  on  different  stories;  to  make  passage-ways  in  the  thickness 
of  the  walls ;  in  short,  to  seek  entirely  new  combinations  of  structures. 
We  do  not  forget,  however,  this  important  point,  that  one  reason 
why  the  ancient  traditions  perpetuate  themselves  in  civil  construc- 
tions is  the  very  natural  one  that  everything  concerning  everyday 
life  transmits  itself  from  generation  to  generation  without  possibility 
of  interruption,  that  domestic  habits  cannot  be  abruptly  changed 
and  that  it  is  possible  to  make  a  radical  revolution  in  the  system  of 
construction  of  public  monuments,  like  churches,  while  this  is  impos- 
sible for  the  dwellings  or  palaces  which  people  live  in  and  in  which 
everybody  follows  the  same  way  of  living  which  his  father  followed. 
The  method  of  construction  applied  at  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century 
to  religious  edifices  has  only  a  feeble  influence  on  civil  edifices. 

The  pointed  arch  had  scarcely  appeared  in  these  last  edifices 
bringing  its  wide-reaching  train  of  consequences  as  we  have  shown. 

Civil  and  military  construction  preserved  something  of  Roman  art 
even  when  the  last  traces  of  this  art  had  long  since  been  abandoned 
in  religious  architecture.  There  were  then  two  quite  distinct  modes 
of  building  dating  from  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century :  the  religious 
and  the  civil ;  and  this  state  of  things  lasted  until  toward  the  middle 
of  the  sixteenth  century.  The  monasteries  even  use  both  of  these 
methods  together;  their  domiciles  have  no  relation,  so  far  as  con- 
struction goes,  with  their  churches  or  their  chapels.  Nevertheless, 
one  of  the  principal  attributes  of  construction  at  the  moment  when 
it  abandons  Roman  traditions,  daring,  is  found  also  in  civil  as  well 
as  in  ecclesiastical  architecture  ;  but,  it  is  evident  in  civil  architec- 
ture, that  the  positive  ideas,  the  daily  needs,  the  inherited  habits 
have  a  more  direct  influence  on  the  methods  adopted  by  the  builder. 
Thus,  for  example,  rock-faced  rubble  is  used  in  civil  architecture  for 


CONSTRUCTION. 


287 


a  long  time  after  all  religious  constructions  were  made  of  cut  stone ; 
horizontal  arches  of  stone  were  everywhere  applied  to  dwellings  in 
the  twelfth,  thirteenth,  fourteenth  and  fifteenth  centuries,  at  a  time 
when  no  trace  of  them  was  longer  to  be  found  in  churches. 

Buttresses  are  avoided  as  much  as  possible  on  the  exterior  of 
palaces  and  mansions,  even  where  there  exist  vaulted  stories,  while 
they  constitute  the  entire  system  of  ecclesiastical  construction.  The 
civil  architects  still  continued  to  employ  wood,  whereas  this  is  used 
only  for  the  roofs  of  cathedrals  and  other  important  religious  edi- 
fices.   Seeking  to  avoid  solids,  to  diminish  points  of  support,  they 


Fig.  121. 

at  last  reached  the  point  of  totally  suppressing  walls  in  rearing 
their  grand  religious  edifices;  on  the  other  hand,  in  civil  architecture 
they  augmented  the  thickness  of  the  walls  in  proportion  as  prosper- 
ous conditions  obtained,  which  created  a  demand  for  more  comfort- 
able, stronger  and  healthier  houses.  The  study  of  these  two  sorts 
of  buildings  should  then  be  followed  up  separately  and  if  we  find 
inevitable  points  of  similarity  between  these  two  systems,  it  will  be 
less  in  the  methods  used  than  in  the  frank  and  daring  charm,  the  in- 
finite resources,  which  belong  to  the  lay  architects  of  mediaeval 
times. 


288 


CIVIL  CONSTRUCTION. 


All  who  have  any  notion  of  architecture  know  that  the  Romans, 
while  indeed  they  constructed  vaulted  edifices,  maintained  the  thrust 
of  the  vaults  rather  by  interior  buttresses  than  by  piers  forming  an 
external  projection.  They  had  adopted,  especially  in  building  civil 
structures,  the  method  which  we  shall  call  cellular  ;  that  is  to  say,  they 
made  their  buildings  of  a  series  of  rooms  with  barrel-vaults  on  bear- 
ing-walls which  reciprocally  buttressed  each  other  and  thus  caused 
no  thrust  on  the  exterior.  From  this  principle  sufficiently  demon- 
strated by  Figure  121  result  the  consequences  which  might  naturally 
be  expected.  If,  for  example,  it  was  desired  to  make  a  single  room 
out  of  all  these  clustered  cells,  it  was  only  necessary  to  throw  a  longi- 
tudinal barrel-vault  across  all  these  transverse  barrel-vaults ;  there 
resulted  a  succession  of  groins,  Figure  1 22,  well  buttressed  by  interior 
counterforts,  letter  A  the  remains  of  the  bearing  walls  B  shown  in  per- 
spective in  the  sketch,  Figure  121.  This  arrangement  permitted 
building  at  C  either  solid  walls  or  spaces  as  light  as  possible,  as  there 
was  no  weight  on  them.  This  was  both  a  simple  and  durable  con- 
struction, easy  to  build  and  which  answered  for  a  long  time  as  the 
type  of  civil  edifices  in  the  Carlovingian  epoch. 

In  order  to  avoid  expense  and  if  vaults  were  not  preferred,  during 
the  Roman  period  they  contented  themselves  with  laying  floors  on 
top  of  two  parallel  ranges  of  semicircular  arches.  In  this  way  sev- 
eral stories  could  be  built  one  above  the  other  without  fear  of  having 
the  lateral  walls  spread,  since  they  were  composed  of  buttresses  fur- 
nishing a  succession  of  interior  piers  and  united  together  by  arches 
which  intersected  ;  underneath  these  arches  as  many  openings  were 
made  as  necessity  demanded  for  furnishing  air  and  light  to  the 
rooms.  Figures  115,  116,  117,  118  which  show  us  one  of  the  houses 
built  in  the  thirteenth  century,  in  the  town  of  Cluny,  still  preserve 
the  remnants  of  this  Roman  tradition,  as  the  front  of  this  house 
really  consists  of  nothing  else  but  a  series  of  bearing  arches  masked 
behind  the  exterior  facing.  If  this  combination  lent  itself  to  the 
most  prosaic  civil  constructions,  it  was  equally  suitable  for  military 


CONSTRUCTION. 


289 


purposes,  as  we  shall  very  soon  see ;  it  was  still  later  applied  to  the 
construction  of  the  great  halls  of  the  chateaux  and  Episcopal  resi- 
dences, since  the  hall  of  Henri  II  at  Fontainebleau  shows  us  one  of 
the  latest  examples  of  it,  seen  likewise  in  a  thirteenth-century  room 
in  the  close  of  the  castle  of  Montargis  and  also  still  to  be  seen  in 
an  ancient  diocesan  hall  of  the  twelfth  century  at  Angiers  near  the 
cathedral,  both  of  these  latter  being  built  according  to  this  principle 
[See  "Salle  "]. 

A  very  important  thing  to  notice  in  the  mediaeval  civil  construc- 
tions is  the  attention  which  the  builders  paid  to  the  smallest  details 


Fig.  I  22. 

of  the  structure.  If  they  are  about  to  make  a  floor,  well  squared 
holes  are  left  for  the  girders  in  the  interior  faces  of  the  walls  instead 
of  cutting  them  out  afterwards;  they  build-in  stone  corbels  under 
the  bearing  ends  of  these  girders  ;  they  make  horizontal  rebates 
lengthwise  of  the  bearing  walls  to  receive  the  headers  into  which 
the  tail-beams  are  framed  or  else  open  bearings  at  regularly  spaced 
intervals.  In  the  embrasures  of  the  windows  they  built  in  the 
hinges ;  they  made  rebates  in  the  interior  of  the  mullions  to  receive 
the  staples  of  the  bolts  or  locks.    Their  chimneys  built  at  the  same 


290 


CIVIL  CONSTRUCTION. 


time  as  the  walls  have  the  flues  dressed  on  the  inside  with  the  greatest 
care ;  the  jambs  of  the  fireplaces  are  bonded  into  the  walls  and 
not  simply  built  up  against  them ;  the  passage  of  the  flues  through 
the  flooring  and  the  supports  of  the  upper  hearths  indicate  great  care- 
fulness and  a  plan  well  thought  out  before  the  work  was  begun.  All 
these  things  would  teach  us  an  excellent  lesson  to-day,  if  we  were 
willing  to  consider  and  rid  ourselves  of  this  mania  of  believing  that 
we  can  obtain  no  good  from  the  past  when  that  past  is  a  cis-alpine 
one. 

In  the  large  civil  structures,  such  as  the  assembly-rooms  or 
"  Halles,"  the  mediaeval  builders  are  almost  always  careful  to  in- 
troduce lower  and  upper  windows ;  the  low  ones  enable  one  to  see 
what  transpires  outside  and  admit  air  ;  the  upper  ones  admit  light 
directly  from  above.  These  upper  windows  are  made  in  the  slope 
of  the  roof  and  form  dormers  on  its  exterior.  Whatever  the  super- 
ficial extent  or  height  of  the  room,  the  windows  were  always  kept  of 
a  size  convenient  for  use  by  men  and  women  and,  what  is  still  more 
important,  of  a  reasonable  size  for  sashes  intended  to  be  frequently 
opened.  So  far  as  the  dormer  sashes  are  concerned  they  were  opened 
like  a  lid  of  a  box  by  means  of  cords  and  pulleys  [See  "Lucarne  "  ].* 

One  is  too  easily  tempted  to  believe  that  however  ingenious  the 

1  These  dormers  faced  with  stone  were  used  in  building  from  the  thirteenth 
century  onward  and,  nevertheless,  in  the  time  of  Louis  XIV,  it  was  pretended  that 
this  method  of  making  windows  at  the  eaves  of  a  roof  was  invented  by  Mansard  '■> 
and  in  order  to  perpetuate  the  remembrance  of  this  useful  invention  the  term  of 
"  mansards  "  has  been  applied  from  that  time  onward  to  this  sort  of  windows 
just  as  if  all  the  civil  buildings,  the  chateaux  and  the  mansions  had  not  been 
provided  with  mansards  in  the  time  of  Francis  I,  Louis  XII,  and  long  before 
their  times.  But  this  is  one  of  the  weaknesses  of  the  seventeenth  century  which 
claimed  to  have  discovered  everything.  But  this  is  only  a  claim.  It  is  in  this 
case  as  in  many  others  of  the  same  epoch.  It  has  been  written  and  said  many 
times,  that  the  wheelbarrow,  for  instance,  was  invented  in  the  seventeenth  cen- 
tury, at  the  time  when  the  great  work  of  terracing  at  Versailles  was  undertaken  ; 
but  we  have  numerous  examples  of  wheelbarrows  figured  on  the  manuscripts 
and  painted  windows  of  the  thirteenth  century.  It  is  true  that  the  form  of  these 
little  vehicles  at  this  epoch  is  much  more  convenient  for  the  laborer  than  that 
adopted  later  than  the  seventeenth  century  which  we  reproduce  religiously  in 
our  workshops  as  if  it  were  a  masterpiece.  It  is  the  same  way  with  the  dray, 
invented,  so  it  is  said,  by  Pascal. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


291 


mediaeval  architects  may  have  been  they  could  not  form  those  large 
conceptions  of  ensemble,  those  vast  buildings  of  a  civil  character 
demanded  by  our  modern  necessities  which  assume  every  day  more 
and  more  importance :  but  this  is  another  prejudice.  It  must  be 
said  that  most  of  our  great  churches  still  standing  to-day  make  us 
see  plainly  that  in  ecclesiastical  architecture  the  constructors  knew 
how  to  begin  and  carry  through  very  vast  monuments  ;  but  as  for  the 
civil  structures  of  the  Middle  Age,  cruelly  treated  during  the  last 
few  centuries,  condemned  to  systematic  destruction  since  the  Revo- 
lution, scorned  by  our  French  administrations  of  Public  Works, 
who  recall  on  a  small  scale  the  weakness  of  Louis  XIV  and  seem 
to  wish  that  everything  in  their  town  shall  bear  trace  of  their  pas- 
sage —  our  civil  structures  of  an  ancient  date,  we  repeat,  have  be- 
come very  rare  and  it  is  not  surprising  that  the  people  have  lost 
even  the  memory  of  them.  Nevertheless  it  would  have  been  very 
strange  if  men  capable  of  conceiving  and  executing  such  immense 
religious  edifices  had  contented  themselves,  for  the  ordinary  needs 
of  life,  with  small  buildings  covering  but  little  ground,  low,  narrow 
species  of  cabins,  of  miserable  appearance.  There  are  certain  per- 
sons who  would  wish  to  make  us  believe,  as  a  consequence  of  a 
spirit  of  system  which  it  is  not  now  our  place  to  criticise,  because  it 
is  completely  a  stranger  to  artistic  ideas,  that  mediaeval  society  was 
shut  up  between  the  church  and  the  fortress ;  that  it  was  in  conse- 
quence, unfitted  to  conceive  and  execute  these  immense  structures 
of  public  utility  demanded  by  our  modern  customs ;  in  short,  that  it 
lived  a  miserable  life,  suffocated  under  two  kinds  of  oppression,  fre- 
quently antagonistic,  but  always  united  for  the  purpose  of  arresting 
its  development.  From  the  standpoint  of  politics  the  fact  may  be  dis- 
cussed, that  is  not  in  our  line ;  but  from  the  standpoint  of  art  there 
can  be  no  discussion.  The  artists  who  drew  the  plans  of  our  cathe- 
drals were  not  at  all  embarrassed  when  it  came  to  constructing  those 
immense  civil  establishments,  such  as  hospitals,  colleges,  town-halls, 
markets,  farm-houses  amply  provided  with  all  appurtenances. 


292 


CIVIL  CONSTRUCTION. 


To  architects,  it  is  of  small  importance  to  know  whether  these  hos- 
pitals, these  colleges,  these  farm-houses  were  dependencies  of  abbeys 
or  cloisters,  whether  these  town-halls  were  frequently  bullied  by 
the  suzerains,  whether  these  markets  paid  a  tribute  to  the  lord  of 
the  manor.  These  establishments  existed,  that  is  all  we  need  to 
state ;  they  were  well  arranged,  well  constructed,  in  a  durable  and 
thoughtful  way  ;  that  we  must  acknowledge.1 

Let  us  take  a  few  examples  ;  let  us  examine  the  excellent  arrange- 
ments of  the  great  halls  of  the  abbey  of  Ourscamp,  of  S.  Jean-des- 
Vignes,  at  Soissons,  of  Mont  S.  Michel,  and  of  the  hospitals  of 
Angers  2  and  Chartres,  which  date  from  the  end  of  the  twelfth  and 
the  beginning  of  the  thirteenth  century.  "Where  shall  we  find  better 
construction,  better  conceptions,  more  ample,  more  healthful,  with- 
out needless  luxury  and  which  give  a  higher  idea  of  the  knowledge 
and  practical  sense  of  their  architects? 

The  general  view  and  details  of  some  of  these  vast  edifices  having 
been  engraved  with  minute  care  in  the  work  of  M.  Verdier  on  civil 
architecture,  we  do  not  deem  it  necessary  to  reproduce  them  here; 
we  shall  give  our  readers  a  few  constructions  which  have  not  before 
been  studied  and  which  have,  at  least,  an  equal  importance  with  those 
mentioned.  There  existed  in  the  Abbey  of  S.  Marie  de  Breteuil,  a 
large  building  flanked  by  four  turrets  and  crenellated,  which  could,  if 
necessary,  be  defended.  Its  ground-floor  contained  the  kitchens  and 
their  dependencies.  The  second  story  contained  the  dormitories  of 
the  guests  of  the  monastery  ;  the  third,  a  large  infirmary  ;  the  fourth, 

iThe  spirit  of  passion  -which  causes  the  destruction  of  castles  and  even 
churches  is  comprehensible;  but  what  is  much  more  difficult  to  explain  is  the 
blind  mania  which  has  brought  about  in  France  during  the  last  sixty  years  the 
demolition  of  numbers  cf  very  good  civil  structures,  very  handsome,  very  useful 
(for  no  other  reason  than  that  they  were  old  and  recalled  a  former  age),  simply  to 
replace  them  by  deplorable  constructions  which  cost  a  great  deal  of  money,  al- 
though they  were  built  in  a  parsimonious  manner  and  are  frequently  decidedly 
ugly.  Many  towns  have  been  deprived  of  establishments  which  would  have  been 
suitable  for  new  uses,  which  would  attract  the  attention  of  travellers  and  which, 
in  short,  did  them  honor. 

2  See"  Architecture,  Civil  et  Domestique,"  de  MM.  Aymar  Verdier  et  Cattois. 


CONSTRUCTION.  293 


Fig.  I  23.    Abbey  of  S.  Marie  de  Breteuil,  France. 

store-rooms  for  provisions  and  the  garret,  under  the  roof,  a  granary 
for  storing  cereals.   A  lateral  staircase  passing  through  the  buttresses 


294 


CIVIL  CONSTRUCTION. 


and  covered  by  a  lean-to  roof  rose  to  the  third  story ;  the  turrets 
at  the  angles  had,  in  addition,  winding  staircases  leading  from  one 
story  to  the  other.  This  structure  was  not  vaulted  except  the  lower 
floor  and  under  the  roof ;  it  is  divided  lengthwise  by  a  range  of  col- 
umns.   Lateral  buttresses  take  the  thrust  of  the  vaults. 

Figure  123  shows  the  exterior  aspect  of  this  structure.1  We 
see  the  gable  on  which  is  built  the  huge  kitchen  chimney.  A  tri- 
angular buttress,  like  a  ship's  prow,  gives  strength  to  this  gable  wall 


Fig.  I  23a. 

in  front  of  the  chimney-flue.  In  order  to  grasp  this  construction 
thoroughly,  it  is  necessary  to  refer  to  the  plan  (123a)  taken  on 
the  ground-floor  level.  The  entire  space  A  A,  that  is  to  say  the 
last  bay  of  the  room,  is  occupied  by  the  fireplace  whose  flue  rises  at 
B  between  two  arches.  At  C  are  exterior  openings  communicating 
by  a  throat  with  the  air  inlets  intended  to  give  a  vigorous  draft  to 
the  fire  built  on  an  elevated  grate  and  to  establish  a  sufficient 


1See  "  Monoy.  d'abbayes."   Bib.  Sainte  Genevieve. 


CONSTRUCTION.  295 

current  of  air  to  carry  away  the 
smoke  into  the  central  flue. 
Figure  1236  made  on  the  line 
I K  oi  the  plan,  shows  us  at  B, 
the  chimney-flue,  at  C  the  throat 
with  its  exterior  opening,  and 
at  D  the  air-inlets.  It  will  be 
observed  that  the  pathway 
around  the  battlements  is  not 
interfered  with  by  the  turrets 
and  the  gables,  but,  on  the  con- 
trary, that  this  pathway  is  con- 
tinuous across  the  gables  on  a 
lower  level.  Figure  1 23c  shows 
at  A,  the  section  of  (he  ground- 
floor  on  the  line  E  F  of  the  plan 
and  at  B  this  section  on  the  line 
G  H.  In  the  section  A  are 
shown  at  C  the  arches  which 
form  the  hood  of  the  chimney 
divided  by  the  large  pillar ;  at 
D  the  mouths  of  the  air-inlets 
with  the  elevated  grate.  In  the 
section  B  the  arches  M  which 
form  the  soffit  of  the  chimney 
are  of  brick  and  the  flue  is 
shown  by  the  dotted  lines  at  0. 
The  dotted  lines  also  show  at  P 
the  two  air-intakes  intended  to 
supply  the  inlets  by  the  throat 
:  iNfcrfcd  behind  the  brick  wall  which 
forms  the  back  of  the  fireplace. 
The  cross-section  (Fig.  124) 
looking    toward    the  gable 


I  2Zb. 


296 


CIVIL  CONSTRUCTION. 


opposite  to  the  chimney,  completes  the  description  of  this  fine 
and  simple  construction.  At  A  is  shown  the  lateral  staircase  which 
leads  up  to  the  second  story  through  the  buttresses,  which  are  given 
greater  projection  in  order  to  provide  for  it.  The  windows  B  of  the 
third  story  used  for  store-rooms  are  pierced  in  the  gable  on  the 
level  of  the  interior  flooring  so  as  to  facilitate  the  hoisting  up,  by 
pulleys  supported  on  exterior  brackets,  of  the  things  to  be  stored. 
Similarly  the  openings  C  are  pierced  on  the  level  of  the  floor  of  the 
garret.    The  thick  side  walls  preserve  an  equable  temperature  in 


Fig.  123c. 

the  interior ;  the  ventilation  of  the  stories  could  easily  be  managed, 
by  means  of  windows  opened  in  the  four  main  walls  on  all  sides  of 
the  isolated  building.  The  buttresses  enclosing  the  walls  dispense 
with  all  transverse  anchorage  and  this  the  more  naturally  because 
the  inner  face  of  the  walls  frequently  overhung  the  story  below,  as 
shown  in  the  transverse  section,  Figure  124. 

This  was  a  means  frequently  employed  to  give  the  walls  an  incli- 
nation inwards,  and  is,  in  fact,  an  excellent  principle  of  construction 
whenever  one  is  able  to  give  to  the  base  of  the  walls,  sufficient 


CONSTRUCTION. 


297 


Fig.  I  24. 

thickness  to  guard  against  danger  of  buckling.  It  must  be  remarked, 
nevertheless,  that   habitually  the   intermediate   girders  (see  the 


298 


CIVIL  CONSTRUCTION. 


transverse  section)  do  not  tie  together  the  bearing  or  side  walls 
\murs-goutterots~\ ;  observe  how  the  ends  of  the  girders  on  the  inter- 
mediate columns  are  arranged.  At  each  story  the  supports  are 
furnished  with  a  cap  A  (Fig.  125),  projecting  only  under  the  girder 


Fig.  125. 


ends.  Consequently  the  bearing  walls  exert  a  pressure  on  these 
girders  and  not  a  pull. 

We  may  not  follow  this  plan  in  our  modern  constructions,  but  it  is 
not  without  its  advantages,  and  the  Greeks  in  ancient  times,  much 
earlier  than  the  epoch  we  are  considering,  had  followed  it  in  build- 
ing their  temples.    If  the  mediaeval  architects  followed  the  laws  of 


CONSTRUCTION. 


299 


equilibrium,  whose  importance  we 
have  endeavored  to  show,  in  build- 
ing the  vast  vaulted  edifices  carried 
on  isolated  supports,  they,  at  the 
same  time,  sought  to  obtain  the  con- 
centration, the  resultant  of  all  the 
forces  acting  toward  the  centre  of 
their  edifices,  in  such  a  way  that  all 
the  parts  had  a  certain  disposition 
to  reciprocally  buttress  one  another. 

In  civil  constructions,  where 
vaults  play  only  a  secondary  role, 
where  the  floors  present  horizontal 
and  rigid  surfaces  at  different 
heights,  the  constructors  adopt 
methods  of  building  which  act»from 
the  outside  inwards  against  these 
rigid  surfaces.  They  reached  this 
result  by  the  arrangement  of  the 
general  plan  and  special  details  of 
construction.  For  instance,  they 
give  the  walls  an  interior  over- 
hang, as  we  have  just  mentioned, 
and  they  build  these  walls  of  large 
stones  on  the  outside  and  with 
courses  of  less  height,  or  with 
rubble  on  the  inside. 

Take,  for  instance,  the  section  of 
a  wall  A-B,  intended  to  carry  the 
girders  (Fig.  126);  the  outer  face 
of  this  wall  will  be  composed  of 
relatively  high  courses  of  stone  not 
bonded,  and  each  story,  separated  by  a  stone  belt-course,  will  be  set  a 


300 


CIVIL  CONSTRUCTION. 


few  centimetres  farther  back  than  the  one  below.  The  interior 
face,  on  the  contrary,  will  be  laid  with  thinner  stones  and  each  story 
will  overhang  the  one  below.  Therefore,  this  wall  will  have  a 
tendency  to  lean  inwards  —  first,  because  its  axis  B  will  fall  at  B', 
inside  the  lower  axis  A  ;  second,  because  the  exterior  face  will  offer 
a  less  compressible  surface  than  does  the  interior  face.  Thus,  this 
wall  constructed  in  this  manner  will  exert  against  the  ends  of  the 
girders  C,  a  more  powerful  pressure  in  proportion  as  these  girders 
are  elevated  above  the  ground.  It  would  be,  therefore,  superfluous 
to  tie  the  walls,  which  instead  of  tending  to  spread,  will  have  on  the 
other  hand,  a  tendency  to  incline  inwards. 

This  example  shows  that  while  the  civil  construction  of  mediaeval 
times  has  its  own  individual  character,  distinct  from  religious  con- 
struction, the  architects,  nevertheless,  endeavor  to  replace  in  one  as 
in  the  other  inert  masses  by  acting  forces.  In  the  civil  construc- 
tions, the  floors  are  considered  as  braces  placed  between  walls  which 
tend  toward  one  another.  Thus  these  floors  are  stiffened  by  the 
pressure  of  the  walls  and  the  whole  mass  of  the  building  shows 
great  solidity  in  consequence  of  these  pressures  against  a  system  of 
braces. 

The  mediaeval  builders  give  proof  of  a  great  deal  of  independence 
in  the  combinations  of  vaults  belonging  to  civil  edifices  ;  everything 
suits  their  purpose,  according  to  the  occasion  or  necessity :  the  cradle 
vault,  the  Roman  groined  vault,  the  pointed,  semicircular  or  stilted 
Gothic  vault,  the  vaults  composed  of  ranges  of  arches  supporting 
ceilings  or  pendentives.  When  they  no  longer  followed  any  but  one 
sort  of  vaulting  in  ecclesiastical  architecture,  that  is  to  say  during 
the  thirteenth  and  fourteenth  centuries,  they  had,  nevertheless,  the 
good  sense  not  to  apply  this  system,  only  in  so  far  as  it  offered  ad- 
vantages in  civil  constructions.  Frequently  very  wide  buildings 
necessitated  the  erection  on  the  interior  of  one.  or  two  rows  of  supports 
to  carry  the  floors  of  the  upper  stories,  as  we  have  before  observed ;  in 
this  case  the  ground-floor  was  generally  vaulted ;  but  as  these  slender 


CONSTRUCTION. 


301 


supports  placed  one  above  the  other  and  only  braced  by  the  floors  had 
no  stability,  they  did  what  they  could  to  give  them  sufficient  base,  at 
least  on  the  lower  piers  carrying  the  vaults,  and  fearing  to  crush  the 
skew-backs  of  these  vaults  under  the  load,  they  made  them  in- 
dependent of  the 
piers. 

Thus,  for  example 
(127)  :  given  a  pier 
A  of  the  ground-floor 
intended  to  carry 
vaults ;  they  laid  on 
this  pier  two  or  three 
courses,  B,  making 
corbels  on  the  four 
faces ;  thus  a  shoulder 
C  was  obtained.  At 
the  angles  were 
placed  skew-backs  D 
following  the  diago- 
nals of  the  squares, 
to  receive  the  vous- 
soirs  E  of  the  vault ; 
in  the  centre,  the 
pier  G  was  carried 
up  free  to  receive  the 
upper  timbers,  then 
Flg*  1  21 '  the  vault  spandrel  II 

was  filled  with  rubble.  Neither  the  skew-backs  of  these  vaults  nor 
their  spandrels  carried  any  load  and  the  masonry  of  the  haunches 
only  braced  the  piers.  Fearing  on  the  ground-floor  the  action 
of  the  thrusts  on  walls,  which  were  not  always  buttressed,  the 
builders  frequently  made  very  heavy  corbels  along  these  walls  to 
diminish  as  much  as  possible  the  thrusts  and  disperse  their  resultant 


302 


CIVIL  CONSTRUCTION. 


over  the  entire  wall,  or  even  over  the  interior  facing  only.  Upon 
these  corbels  they  were  then  able  to  place  segmental  arches  which 
required  less  rise.  Abandoning  groined  or  pointed  vaults,  they 
carried  vertical  tympani  B,  on  the  large  arches  A,  perpendicular 
to  the  walls  (128),  up  to  the  level  of  the  extrados  of  the  key  of 


Fig.  128. 

these  arches,  A  ;  then  they  sprung  over  these  tympani  segmental 
cradle  vaults,  C.  In  this  way  they  succeeded  in  vaulting  over  large 
spaces  without  requiring  much  rise  and  without  lowering  the  spring- 
ings  so  much  as  to  interfere  with  the  passageway.  By  multiplying 
and  bringing  these  arches  nearer  together  they  were  able  to  replace 
the  vaultings  C,  with  flags  making  a  floor  placed  on  stone  purlins  (if 


CONSTRUCTION. 


303 


materials  were  suitable),  as  shown  in  Figure  129.  These  purlins 
had  rebates,  thus  bringing  their  upper  surfaces  level  with  the  flags 
shown  by  dotted  line  E-F.  These  methods  of  building  obtained  for 
a  long  time  without  sensible  modifications,  for  we  still  see  construc- 
tions of  the  fifteenth  century  which  reproduce  these  simple,  imposing 


Fig.  I  29. 

and  severe  dispositions.  The  finest  example  which  we  know  of 
these  civil  constructions,  in  which  corbels  play  a  very  important  part, 
is  the  castle  of  IIoh-Koenigsbourg,  near  Schelestadt.1 

One  could  almost  take  the  principal  rooms  of  this  Chateau  for 

^ee  the  ground  plan  of  this  Chateau  under  the  word  Ch&teau,  Figures  30,  31, 
room  M. 


304 


CIVIL  CONSTRUCTION. 


Fig.  130.    Castle  at  Hoji-Kcenigsbourg. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


305 


thirteenth-century  constructions,  whereas,  they  were  not  built  until 
the  fifteenth  century, 

But  Alsace  had  kept  the  good  old  traditions  of  the  Gothic  epoch, 
especially  in  civil  architecture.  The  principal  building  of  the 
Chateau  Hoh-Koenigsbourg  abutting  against  the  rock  (130),  is  built 
only  of  interior  buttresses  with  a  very  thin  exterior  wall  on  the  court 
side.  It  has  four  stories ;  the  ground-floor,  which  was  used  for  a 
kitchen,  has  a  segmental-cradle  vault  resting  on  verv  flat  arches  of 
ashlar,  sprung  from  one  pier  to  the  other.  The  first  story  is  ceiled  by 
means  of  large  dressed  lintels,  carried  by  strong  corbels  ;  the  paral- 
lelograms left  void  between  the  lintels  are  filled  with  rubble.  The 
second  story  is  covered  by  a  wooden  flooring  whose  principal  girders 
are  carried  on  corbels  built  into  the  piers.  A  third  story  has  a  semi- 
circular cradle  vault,  resting  upon  lintels  —  and  on  large  corbels 
similarly  arranged  to  the  first  story.  This  upper  vault  carries  a 
platform  or  terrace  covered  by  flags.  The  perspective  section  (Fig. 
130)  gives  the  general  appearance  of  this  peculiar  construction.  It 
should  be  stated  that  the  local  materials  (a  reddish  sandstone)  are 
adapted  to  these  bold  methods  ;  the  employment  of  such  thin  lintels, 
of  such  wide  span,  would  be  inadmissible  for  us  with  our  calcareous 
materials  from  the  Seine,  Oise  or  Aisne  valleys.1 

But  in  civil  and  military  architecture,  even  more  than  in  ecclesias- 
tical architecture,  the  nature  of  the  materials  had  a  very  marked 
influence  in  the  selection  of  methods  of  construction ;  this  example 
is  a  proof  of  it.  The  longitudinal  lintels  between  the  buttresses  and 
the  transversal  ones  from  one  buttress  to  another  have  voussoir 
joints.  If  we  make  a  longitudinal  section  of  this  building,  each  bay 
gives  us  (Fig.  131). 2 

It  is  impossible  for  one  to  form  an  idea  of  the  majestic  grandeur 
of  these  buildings  unless  he  has  seen  them.    Luxury  is  not  considered 

1  In  the  sixteenth  century  an  accident  compelled  the  owners  of  Hoh-Koenigs- 
bourg to  spring  arches  under  the  ceilings  of  the  first  story. 

2M.  Boeswilwald,  who  has  made  plans  of  the  Chateau  of  Hoh-Koenigsbourg 
with  the  greatest  care,  has  been  kind  enough  to  put  his  drawings  at  our  disposal. 


306 


CIVIL  CONSTRUCTION. 


CONSTRUCTION.  307 

here  ;  it  is  pure  construction  and  the  architecture  takes  no  other 
form  than  that  imposed  by  the  judicious  employment  of  the 
materials  ;  the  principal  points  of  support  and  the  lintels  are  alone 
in  cut  stone,  the  rest  of  the  structure  in  stuccoed  rubble.  We  are 
free  to  admit  that  this  way  of  understanding  civil  architecture  has 
a  peculiar  attraction  for  us.  It  should  be  said  that  the  Chateau  of 
Hoh-Koenigsbourg  is  built  on  the  summit  of  a  high  mountain,  eight 
months  of  the  year  surrounded  by  snow  and  fog,  and  that  in  such 
a  situation  it  would  have  been  very  ridiculous  to  choose  architectonic 
forms  which  could  only  have  been  appreciated  by  the  eagles  and  the 
vultures ;  that  the  savage  aspect  of  these  structures  is  in  perfect 
harmony  with  the  ruggedness  of  the  place. 

In  this  connection  we  shall  be  permitted  to  make  an  important 
observation.  We  think  ourselves  the  first  to  appreciate  that  which 
is  called  the  picturesque,  because  since  the  seventeenth  century  no 
one  has  found  any  beauty,  except  in  parks  planted  a  la  Francaise, 
in  right-angled  and  symmetrical  buildings,  in  terraces  veneered  with 
stones  and  cascades  with  lead-lined  channels.  Without  denying  the 
value  of  nature  thus  arranged  by  art,  we  must,  nevertheless, 
recognize  the  fact  that  nature  left  to  herself  is  more  varied,  more 
free,  more  grandiose  and  more  essentially  beautiful.  A  Seignior  of 
the  Court  of  Louis  Fourteenth  or  of  Louis  Fifteenth  would  very  much 
prefer  the  parks  of  Versailles  or  Sceaux,  to  the  wild  vistas  of  the 
gorges  of  the  Alps  or  the  Pyrenees;  the  Duke  of  St.  Simon,  who  had 
no  office  at  Court,  preferred  to  dwell  in  a  narrow  and  gloomy  apart- 
ment at  Versailles  than  to  live  in  his  charming  residence,  la  Ferte. 
But  our  mediaeval  lords  were,  on  the  contrary,  sensible  to  these 
natural  beauties,  they  loved  them  because  they  dwelt  among  them. 
Without  speaking  of  the  very  lively  appreciation  of  nature  to  be 
found  in  the  numerous  romances  of  the  Middle  Ages,  we  see  the 
castles,  the  manors,  the  abbeys,  are  always  so  situated  as  to  give 
their  inhabitants  views  of  the  surrounding  localities. 

Their  construction  harmonizes  with  these  localities ;  wild  and 


308  CIVIL  CONSTRUCTION. 

imposing  in  abrupt  places ;  fine  and  elegant  at  the  foot  of  laughing 
slopes,  on  the  banks  of  tranquil  rivers,  in  the  midst  of  verdant 
plains.  In  these  houses,  the  views  of  the  most  picturesque  points 
are  always  arranged  with  skill  and  in  such  fashion  as  to  present 
unexpected  and  varied  aspects.  In  studying  the  civil  constructions 
of  mediaeval  times,  it  is,  therefore,  necessary  to  take  into  considera- 
tion the  locality,  the  nature  of  the  climate,  the  site,  for  all  these 
things  exercise  an  influence  on  the  builder. 

A  building  which  is  suitably  arranged  and  constructed  on  a  level 
site,  in  a  country  of  gentle  and  tranquil  aspect,  would  be  ridiculous 
on  the  top  of  a  savage  cliff  surrounded  by  precipices.  Another  one 
by  its  severe  and  even  harsh  character  seems  to  grow  out  of  the 
desolate  soil  where  it  rises,,  but  would  appear  deformed  and  coarse 
surrounded  by  fields  and  meadows. 

Those  barbarous  men,  as  they  are  considered  by  most  people, 
were  then  sensible  to  natural  beauties  and  their  dwellings  reflected, 
so  to  speak,  these  different  sorts  of  beauty  —  harmonized  with  them. 
We,  who  are  civilized  and  who  pretend  to  have  invented  the 
picturesque,  build  elegant  pavilions  on  some  rustic  site,  which  seems 
to  have  been  intended  to  carry  a  fortress  ;  and  we  build  massive 
structures  on  the  bank  of  a  streamlet  running  through  a  meadow. 
This  would  lead  us  to  believe  that  these  mediaeval  barbarians  loved 
and  understood  nature,  without  making  much  ado  over  it  and  that 
we,  who  boast  of  it  on  every  occasion  in  prose  and  in  verse,  look  at 
it  with  a  careless  eye,  without  being  sensible  to  its  beauties.  Cen- 
turies are  like  individuals,  they  wish  always  to  be  considered  gifted 
with  the  qualities  which  are  wanting  in  them  and  care  very  little  for 
those  which  they  do  possess.  Everybody  fought  for  religion  in  the 
sixteenth  century  and  nine-tenths  of  the  combatants  on  both  sides 
did  not  even  believe  in  God.  They  prided  themselves  on  chivalry 
and  on  refined  manners  in  the  seventeenth  century  and  their  minds 
turned  very  strongly,  even  at  that  epoch,  toward  positive  ideas 
and  the  satisfaction  of  material  wants.    In  the  eighteenth  century 


CONSTRUCTION. 


309 


they  conversed  only  about  virtue,  nature,  gentle  philosophy,  when 
virtue  was  scarcely  in  vogue,  when  nature  was  looked  at  through  the 
glazed  window  of  one's  chamber  and  in  lieu  of  gentle  philosophy, 
the  only  sort  which  was  practised  was  founded  on  the  assured  well- 
being  of  one's  self  and  one's  friends. 

But  to  return  to  our  buildings  :  the  system  of  corbelled  construc- 


Fig.  132. 

tions  was  very  much  in  vogue  from  the  twelfth  century  in  civil 
structures ;  it  is,  in  fact,  economical  and  full  of  resources,  whether 
for  carrying  floors,  for  avoiding  very  great  thickness  of  walls  and 
considerable  foundations,  receiving  the  framing,  carrying  the  over- 
hangs, obtaining  more  extensive  surfaces  in  the  upper  stories  of 
buildings  than  on  the  ground-floor,  providing  for  subdivisions  for 


310 


CIVIL  CONSTRUCTION. 


communicating  staircases  from  one  story  to  another,  offering  shelter, 
etc.  It  was  another  application  of  that  principle  of  the  mediaeval 
architects,  which  consisted  in  employing  active  forces  instead  of 
passive  forces  ;  for  a  corbel  is  a  lever  which  needs  a  counterpoise 
in  order  to  fulfil  its  function.  Corbels  have  the  advantage  of  not 
producing  any  thrusts,  always  difficult  to  counterbalance  in  construc- 
tions where  the  apartments  are  planned  for  special  purposes,  with 
thin  walls  cutting  one  another  irregularly.  They  require  less  rise 
than  arches,  or  can  neutralize  their  thrust  by  placing  the  skew-backs 
outside  the  face  of  the  walls,  which  is  easily  demonstrated.  Let  AB 
(132)  be  the  opening  of  a  room  whose  flooring  is  supported  by 
arches,  as  was  shown  in  Figures  128,  129;  AC,  BD,  the  thick- 
ness of  the  walls  ;  CE  the  height  between  joists.  If  we  carry  the 
arch  GF  on  the  wall,  even  admitting  that  we  have  a  heavy  weight 
at  K,  there  is  reason  to  fear  that  we  shall  exercise  such  a  thrust 
from  G  to  H  that  the  wall  will  buckle  outwards,  for  the  resistance 
of  the  friction  of  the  bed  GH  will  not  be  sufficient  to  prevent  a  slip ; 
or  if  there  is  no  slip,  the  length  GH  is  not  such  that  the  bed  may  not 
open  outside  and  fall  off  inside,  as  is  shown  at  7,  an  effect  which  will 
produce  a  buckling  of  the  wall  and  consequently  the  fall  of  the 
arches.  But  if  we  have  a  strongly  projecting  skew-back  L,  and  two 
corbel  courses  MN,  and  supposing  that  K'  is  a  reasonable  weight, 
we  can  counteract  the  slip  by  a  much  more  extended  bed  LO  and 
by  a  greater  friction  ;  the  curve  of  resistance  exercised  by  the  arch, 
which  curve  touches  the  bed  LO,  at  P,  will  meet  there  a  resist- 
ance which  will  resolve  itself  into  a  line  PR,  more  or  less  inclined 
according  as  the  weight  of  the  upper  load  K'  is  less  or  greater. 

If  this  load  is  a  heavy  one  from  the  point  R,  the  resultant  of  the 
thrusts  might  become  vertical,  and  fall  within  the  interior  face  of 
the  wall,  which  would  matter  little  ;  that  is  all  that  we  could  expect. 

The  builder  took  the  precaution  in  this  case  of  putting,  at  least, 
one  course  with  its  interior  face  vertical  to  the  perpendicular  from 
the  meeting  of  the  arch  with  the  corbelled  skew-back,  for  he  thus 


CONSTRUCTION. 


311 


augments  the  resistance  to  the  thrust  by  the  friction  of  the  beds  of 
two  stones  ;  while  if  he  put  only  one  corbel  course  under  the  skew- 
back,  as  indicated  at  S,  he  would  have  only  the  resistance  of  the 
bed  TV  to  counteract  the  thrust,  and  the  buckling  of  the  wall  might 
result  at  Y  as  it  did  at  H'.  When  builders  could  not  for  any  cause 
give  to  their  corbelling  the  height  of  three  or  four  courses,  they 
obtained  very  resistant  stones  and  (133j  they  placed  them  with 
sufficient  projection  as  shown  in  section  A,  to  make  the  curve  of 
pressure  of  the  arch  fall  at  B  within  the  interior  face  of  the  wall ; 

this  gives  the  stone  A 
a  lever  action  —  they, 
therefore,  support  it  by 
a  slight  projection  C ; 
its  lever  movement 
would  then  describe 
the  arc  of  a  circle  of 
which  D  is  the  centre. 
To  overcome  this  lever 
movement  there  is  the 
weight  E  beside  that  of 
the  masonry  spandrel 
F.  The  leverage  beins 
overcome,  the  corbel  A 
has  no  other  tendency  than  to  slip  from  B  toward  G.  Then  the 
problem  is  to  make  the  friction  sufficiently  great  on  this  bed  DG  by 
means  of  the  vertical  weight  E  to  prevent  this  slipping.  Corbels 
then  possess  two  properties  :  that  of  carrying  weights  on  the  princi- 
ple of  levers  heavily  weighted  by  the  load  at  one  end,  and  the  action 
of  resistance  to  oblique  thrusts  by  the  augmentation  of  the  surfaces  of 
friction.  Thus  we  see  that  in  all  cases  the  mediaeval  builders 
employed  active  resistances,  that  is  to  say  a  system  of  equilibrium, 
instead  of  the  principle  of  passive  resistance  of  the  Roman 
construction. 


Fig.  133. 


312 


CIVIL  CONSTRUCTION 


As  was  always  their  custom,  however,  these  builders  carry  the 
consequences  of  an  established  principle  to  its  utmost  limits  ;  they  do 
not  seem  to  understand  those  obstacles  which  our  modern  art  places 
in  the  way  of  bold  attempts  in  the  shape  of  the  academic  veto.  Con- 
struction is  not  for  them  that  science  which  consists  in  saying : 
"  Here  are  the  rules,  here  are  the  examples,  follow  them  out,  do  not 
go  beyond  them."  On  the  contrary,  Science  for  them  says  :  "  These 
"are  the  general  principles,  they  are  broad,  they  indicate  nothing 
"but  methods.  In  their  application  extend  them  as  much  as  the 
"  material  and  your  experience  allows  you  ;  we  ask  nothing  of  you 
"  except  to  remain  faithful  to  these  general  principles ;  moreover, 
"  everything  is  possible  to  him  who  knows  how  to  apply  them."  Is 
that  a  stationary  art,  hieratic,  alien  to  the  modern  spirit,  as  they 
liave  undertaken  for  so  long  a  time  to  make  us  believe  ?  Is  it  retro- 
grading to  study  it,  to  investigate  it  ?  Is  it  the  fault  of  this  art  if 
very  many  imitate  only  the  exterior  appearance  of  it,  if  they  com- 
promise its  further  development  by  maladroit  copies  ?  Do  we 
impute  to  antiquity  the  bad  copies  of  its  art  ?  Why  then  blame  the 
arts  of  the  Middle  Ages  in  France  for  the  false  applications  which 
have  been  made  of  them,  whether  in  Italy  before  the  Renaissance, 
or  at  home  in  our  own  time  ?  Since  the  moment  when  it  was 
admitted  that  there  was  no  architecture  except  in  Italy,  since  the 
architects  have  flocked  like  sheep  marching  in  each  other's  footsteps, 
to  study  their  art  in  that  country,  academic  instruction  has  been 
willing  to  see  the  Middle  Ages  only  there.  But  the  mediaeval 
edifices  in  Italy,  from  the  structural  point-of-view,  evince  but  a  pas- 
sable comprehension  of  the  subject.  Almost  always  they  are  nothing 
but  constructions  derived  from  Roman  antiquity,  invested  with  a 
pretty  bad  covering  borrowed  from  the  arts  of  the  North  or  the 
Orient.  Assuredly  it  is  not  necessary  to  cross  the  Alps  to  study 
that.  For  construction,  there  are  neither  settled  principles  nor 
coherence,  but  a  disordered  mass  of  confused  traditions,  influences 


CONSTRUCTION. 


313 


which  combat  one  another,  a  barbarous  love  for  luxury  alongside  of 
evident  feebleness.1 

What  are  these  basilicas  in  Rome  for  example,  reconstructed 
for  the  most  part  in  the  thirteenth  century,  if  they  are  compared  to 
the  edifices  built  here  at  home  at  that  epoch  ?  Miserable  brick  walls, 
badly  put  together,  on  fragments  and  capitals  torn  from  antique 
monuments.  In  these  barbarous  structures,  where  is  the  study?  If 
we  consider  them  with  respect  and  curiosity,  is  it  not  because  they 
offer  us  the  spoils  of  magnificent  edifices  ?  If  we  marvel  before  rich 
stolen  jewels,  in  a  palace,  is  it  the  thief  who  excites  our  admiration? 
Let  us  then  be  sincere  and  put  things  in  their  right  places.  If  the 
Romans  of  the  Middle  Ages  found  a  soil  covered  with  antique 
debris ;  if  the  baths  of  Caracalla  were  still  standing  and  almost 
intact  up  to  the  thirteenth  century,  as  well  as  the  Coliseum,  struct- 
ures on  the  Palatine  and  so  many  other  edifices,  shall  we  go  out  of 
our  way  to  admire  the  works  of  men  more  barbarous  than  the 
Vandals  and  the  Huns,  who  have  in  cold  blood  destroyed  these  mon- 
uments in  order  to  erect  bad  buildings,  in  which  these  debris  them- 
selves are  unskilfully  used,  coarsely  handled  ?  We  see  in  all  this 
only  the  vanity  of  a  powerless  people ;  intelligence,  ideas,  art  itself 
are  completely  wanting.  What  a  different  spectacle  in  this  country  ! 
The  lay  architects  in  France  were  then  laboring  assiduously  ;  with- 
out a  thought  for  their  personal  glory,  they  sought  only  to  develop 
the  principles  which  they  had  discovered  ;  they  believed  that  the 
future  was  theirs  and  this  was  not  an  illusion,  for  they  were  the  first 
to  commence  in  the  modern  era  the  great  struggle  of  intellectual 

1  A  single  example  to  show  that  we  do  not  exaggerate.  We  have  noticed  in 
this  article  as  a  result  of  what  persistent  efforts  the  constructors  of  the  North 
mastered  the  thrusts  of  vaults  and  in  what  conditions  they  were  satisfied  with 
the  stability  of  these  vaults.  But,  in  Italy,  the  spreading  of  the  arches  of 
vaulted  monuments  during  the  Middle  Ages  and  even  the  Renaissance  is  pre- 
vented by  exposed  iron  bars  at  their  springings.  At  this  rate  one  can  easily  dis- 
pense with  the  whole  train  of  flying  buttresses  and  devices  to  secure  equilibrium. 
They  take  good  care  neither  to  show  these  iron  bars  in  the  drawings  which  they 
give  us,  nor  to  speak  of  them  in  their  treatises  on  the  subject.  But,  in  truth,  is 
that  a  method  of  construction  ?   Is  it  not  rather  a  confession  of  inability  ? 


314 


CIVIL  CONSTRUCTION. 


man  against  brute  matter.  The  constructors  of  antiquity  are  the 
allies  and  frequently  the  slaves  of  matter ;  they  are  subject  to  its 
laws  ;  the  lay  constructors  of  mediaeval  times  declare  themselves  its 
antagonists ;  they  maintain,  that  mind  ought  to  gain  the  mastery  and 
render  it  subject  and  that  it  will  obey.  It  is  indeed  to  be  expected 
that  we  who  pierce  mountains  so  as  to  travel  easier  and  faster,  who 
no  longer  pay  any  attention  to  distances  and  who  defy  natural 
phenomena,  should  scorn  those  who,  by  their  inquiring  and  subtle 
spirit,  their  disinterested  faith  in  principles  based  on  reason  and 
calculation  (disinterested  certainly,  for  scarcely  have  the  names  of 
even  a  few  of  them  come  down  to  us)  have  been  centuries  in  advance 
of  us  and  who  have  only  made  the  mistake  of  living  too  early,  of 
being  too  modest  and  of  having  believed  that  other  people  would 
understand  them.  They  tell  us  that  history  is  just;  we  hope  so; 
but  its  justice  sometimes  has  to  be  waited  for  a  long  time.  We 
admit  that  from  the  twelfth  to  the  fifteenth  century,  political  society 
is  in  disorder ;  the  clergy  were  usurpers,  the  feudal  lords  were 
tyrants,  kings  were  sometimes  pliant,  sometimes  false  and  always 
ambitious ;  Jews  were  usurers  and  the  peasantry  were  miserable 
brutes,  that  this  society  is  permeated  by  ridiculous  superstitions  and 
pays  little  attention  to  morality ;  but  we  see  quietly  appear  in  the 
midst  of  this  chaos  a  class  of  men  who  are  neither  monks,  nobles, 
nor  peasants,  seizing  upon  the  most  abstract  art  —  the  one  which 
lends  itself  to  calculations,  to  logical  developments ;  the  art  to 
which  every  one  must  have  recourse,  for  it  is  necessary  that  people 
shall  be  lodged,  protected,  defended,  shall  make  temples,  dwellings 
and  fortresses.  We  see  this  class  attract  to  itself  all  the  artisans 
and  submit  them  to  its  discipline.  In  less  than  half  a  century  this 
association  of  indefatigable  workers  discovered  entirely  new  prin- 
ciples, capable  of  infinite  extension ;  it  has  brought  into  all  the  arts 
analysis,  reasoning,  investigation,  in  place  of  routine  and  decrepit 
traditions.  It  establishes  schools ;  it  goes  on  without  stopping  a 
single  day,  isolated,  but  systematized,  tenacious,  subtle,  in  the  midst 


CONSTRUCTION. 


315 


of  anarchy  and  general  indecision.  It  mounted  the  first  steps  of  the 
modern  industry,  of  which  we  are  with  good  reason  proud ;  and 
because  of  the  fact  that  this  association  devotes  its  time  to  work, 
instead  of  inditing  memoirs  in  its  own  praise ;  because  its  members, 
more  solicitous  of  making  their  principles  triumph  than  of  obtaining 
personal  glory,  write  their  names  on  a  few  stones ;  that  by  reason  of 
researches  they  even  arrive  at  abusing  these  principles;  because 
finally  this  association  is  overwhelmed  under  the  last  three  centuries 
whose  vanity  at  least  equals  their  distinction,  shall  we  be  so  ungrate- 
ful to-day  as  not  to  recognize  what  we  owe  it,  so  senseless  as  not  to 
profit  by  its  labor?  And  wherefore  this  ingratitude,  and  this  foolish- 
ness ?  Because  a  few  lazy  minds  secure  in  their  positions  pretend 
to  preserve  the  principles  of  a  dead  art,  which  they  take  good  care 
not  to  put  into  practice  ;  which  they  do  not  even  clearly  announce  ? 
Who  are  the  retrograde  minds  ?  Are  they  those  who  would  con- 
demn us  to  reproduce  for  ever  and  ever  the  incomplete  or  ill-digested 
attempts  made  by  the  last  three  centuries  to  regenerate  the  archi- 
tecture of  the  Romans,  or  those  who  seek  to  restore  to  honor  the 
resources  of  an  art  at  once  systematic  and  audacious,  lending  itself  to 
all  the  combinations  and  to  all  the  developments  necessitated  by  the 
varying  requirements  of  modern  civilization  ?  The  balance  of 
the  history  of  the  arts  would  be  exact  if  it  were  held  by  an  impartial 
hand,  if,  instead  of  names,  deeds  were  put  into  its  scales,  monuments 
in  place  of  individualities.  What  have  we,  in  fact,  to  offset  such 
names  as  Dioto  Salvi,  Arnolpho  di  Lapo,  Brunelleschi,  Michelozzo, 
Baltazar  Peruzzi,  Bramante,  San  Micheli,  San-Sovino,  Pirro  Ligorio, 
Yignola,  Ammanati,  Palladio,  Serlio,  Jean  Bullant,  Pierre  Lescot, 
Philibert  Delorme,  Ducerceau,  and  so  on  ?  Two  or  three  names 
scarcely  known ;  but  if  our  French  mediaeval  monuments  could 
speak  ;  if  they  could  give  us  the  modest  names  of  their  authors  —  if, 
especially  in  face  of  the  works  of  the  men  we  have  just  cited,  they 
could  show  us  all  the  mysteries  of  their  construction,  then  assuredly 
history  would  do  them  justice  and  we  should  cease  to  be  the  dupes, 


316 


CIVIL  CONSTRUCTION. 


to  our  own  detriment,  of  a  mystification  which  has  lasted  through 
more  than  three  centuries. 

Occidental  Europe  can  boast  with  good  reason  of  having  provoked 
the  great  intellectual  movement  of  the  Renaissance  and  we  are  not 
among  those  who  regret  this  return  towards  the  arts  and  the  ideas 
of  Pagan  antiquity.  Our  century  follows,  that  of  Montesquieu  and 
Voltaire  ;  we  do  not  renounce  those  great  minds,  —  we  profit  by  their 
perspicuity,  their  love  for  truth,  reason  and  justice ;  they  have 
opened  the  way  for  criticism,  they  have  extended  the  domain  of 
intelligence  ;  but  what  do  they  teach  us?  Is  it,  perchance,  to  subject 
ourselves  eternally  reproducing  their  ideas,  to  conform  ourselves 
without  scrutiny  to  their  personal  tastes,  to  share  their  errors  and 
their  prejudices,  for  they  are  no  more  exempt  than  others  from 
these  ?  That  would  be  to  understand  them  very  poorly.  What  do 
they  say  to  us  on  every  page  ?  "  Enlighten  yourselves,  do  not  stop, 
k<  put  to  one  side  opinions  already  made ;  these  are  almost  always 
"  prejudices  ;  intelligence  has  been  given  to  man  so  that  he  may  ex- 
"  amine,  compare,  collect,  choose  but  not  conclude,  for  to  conclude  is 
"  to  end  ;  and  he  is  a  fool  who  pretends  to  say  :  '  I  have  closed  the 
"  human  book  !  "'  Is  it  then  the  particular  task  of  a  given  philoso- 
pher that  should  be  taken  for  a  model,  or  his  way  of  reasoning,  his 
method  ?  Voltaire  does  not  like  the  Gothic,  because  Gothic  art 
belongs  to  the  Middle  Ages,  whose  last  prop  he  undermines  :  that 
only  proves  that  he  knows  nothing  of  this  art  and  that  he  obeys  a 
prejudice.  That  is  a  misfortune  for  him ;  it  is  not  a  rule  of  conduct 
for  artists.  Let  iis  try,  if  we  can,  to  reason  as  he  does  ;  let  us  bring 
to  the  study  of  our  art  his  spirit  of  analysis  and  criticism,  his  good 
sense,  his  ardent  passion  for  that  which  he  believes  to  be  just  ;  and 
we  shall  succeed  in  finding  that  mediaeval  architecture  is  founded  on 
new  and  fruitful  principles,  different  from  those  of  the  Romans; 
that  these  principles  may  be  more  useful  to  us  to-day  than  are  the 
Roman  traditions.  The  rare  spirits  who  have  acquired  in  their 
times  a  great  influence  are  like  torches  which  illumine  only  the  spot 


CONSTRUCTION. 


317 


where  they  are  placed  ;  they  can  only  enlighten  distinctly  that  which 
surrounds  them.  But  shall  we  say  that  there  are  no  more  objects 
in  the  world  than  those  on  which  they  have  shed  their  light?  Put 
them  in  other  surroundings,  —  they  will  shed  upon  other  objects  the 
same  light.  But  we  are  thus  constituted  in  France  :  we  look  at 
the  illuminated  objects  without  noticing  the  torch,  without  even 
transporting  it  elsewhere  to  utilize  its  light  in  examining  everything. 
We  prefer  to  adhere  to  the  judgments  pronounced  by  distinguished 
intellects  rather  than  to  use  their  method  of  examining  facts,  so  as 
to  reach  our  own  conclusions.  In  truth,  this  is  much  easier.  We 
admire  their  boldness,  the  range  of  their  vision ;  but  we  do  not  dare 
to  be  bold  like  them,  to  see  further  than  they  or  anything  else  than 
that  which  they  have  been  willing  or  able  to  see.  But  we  have 
wandered  from  our  mediaeval  master-workman. 

Let  us  come  back  to  them,  especially  since  they  probably  never 
suspected  that  it  would  one  day  be  necessary  to  blacken  so  much 
paper,  in  their  own  land,  in  the  endeavor  to  make  their  efforts  and 
their  progress  appreciated.  In  advance  of  their  century,  by  the 
breadth  of  their  ideas  and  still  more  by  their  independence  as 
artists ;  disdained  by  more  enlightened  centuries,  who  have  not 
wished  to  give  themselves  the  trouble  to  understand  them  ;  in  truth, 
their  destiny  is  hard.    Will  the  day  of  justice  for  them  never  come? 

The  necessities  of  civil  construction  are  much  more  varied  than 
those  of  ecclesiastical  construction ;  thus  civil  architecture  affords 
the  mediaeval  architects  the  opportunity  of  manifesting  the  numerous 
resources  which  are  to  be  found  in  the  principles  by  which  they 
were  governed.  It  is  necessary  to  define  fully  these  principles,  for 
they  have  great  importance.  The  architecture  of  the  Romans  (not 
that  of  the  Greeks,  let  it  be  well  understood)  1  is  a  structure  clothed 

1  For  those  architects  who  have  somewhat  studied  the  arts  of  antiquity,  the 
difference  between  the  architecture  of  the  Geeks  and  that  of  the  Romans  is 
perfectly  well  defined  :  these  two  arts  follow  opposite  roads  as  we  have  said 
many  times  ;  but  it  is  not  so  for  the  vulgar,  who  confound  these  two  arts,  just 
as  if  one  was  only  a  mere  derivative  from  the  other.   How  many  times  has  it  not 


318 


CIVIL  CONSTRUCTION. 


with  a  decoration  which  thus  becomes,  in  virtue  of  the  fact,  archi- 
tecture, visible  architecture. 

If  one  undertakes  to  measure  a  Roman  monument  he  must  per- 
form two  operations :  the  first  consists  in  taking  account  of  the 
methods  employed  to  rear  the  carcass,  the  construction,  the  struct- 
ure itself ;  the  second  to  find  out  how  this  construction  has  taken  a 
visible  form  more  or  less  beautiful,  or  more  or  less  well  adapted  to 
this  body.    We  have  elsewhere  given  an  account  of  this  method.1 

This  system  possesses  its  advantages,  but  it  is  frequently  nothing 
but  a  clever  falsehood.  Roman  construction  can  be  studied  inde- 
pendently from  Roman  architecture,  and  that  which  proves  this  is 
that  the  artists  of  the  Renaissance  studied  that  exterior  form  with- 
out taking  account  of  the  body  which  it  covered. 

The  architecture  and  the  construction  of  the  Middle  Ages  cannot 
be  separated,  for  that  architecture  is  nothing  else  than  a  form  com- 
manded by  that  very  construction.  There  is  not  a  member,  however 
minute  it  be,  in  Gothic  architecture,  at  the  epoch  when  it  passed 
into  the  hands  of  the  lay-workers,  which  is  not  prescribed  by  a  con- 
structive necessity  ;  and  if  the  Gothic  structure  is  very  varied,  the 
needs  to  which  it  must  submit  itself  are  themselves  numerous  and 
varied.  We  do  not  hope  to  present  to  the  eyes  of  our  readers  all 
the  applications  of  the  system  of  civil  construction  among  mediaeval 
people ;  neither  can  we  undertake  to  show  in  outline  the  principal 
paths  followed  by  this  system ;  for  one  of  the  most  striking  qualities 
of  mediaeval  art,  as  of  manners,  is  its  individuality.  If  one  under- 
takes to  generalize,  he  falls  into  the  strangest  errors,  in  the  sense 
that  the  exceptions  are  more  important,  than  the  rule  ;  if  he  under- 
takes to  give  an  account  of  some  of  these  exceptions,  he  does  not 

been  written,  for  instance,  that  the  portal  of  Saint  Gervais,  at  Paris,  is  a  Gre- 
cian portal?  It  is  scarcely  more  Greek  than  Roman.  It  is,  nevertheless,  on 
judgments  as  blind  as  this  that  the  criticism  of  the  arts  of  architecture  has  been 
based  with  us  for  a  long  time  and  that  is  because  we,  architects,  perhaps  from 
indifference,  are  the  only  ones  in  France  who  do  not  write  about  our  art. 
iSee  our  "  Discourses  on  Architecture.'''' 


CONSTRUCTION. 


319 


know  which  one  to  choose,  and  he  narrows  the  picture.  We  can,  we 
believe,  bring  out  the  principles,  which  are  simple  and  rigorous  and 
pick  out  from  among  the  applications  those  which  best  and  most 
clearly  express  these  principles. 

The  few  examples  which  we  have  given  show,  we  hope,  the  con- 
sequences of  the  principle  received  by  the  secular  architects  of 
mediaeval  times  :  manifestation  of  the  means  used  in  the  structure 
of  edifices  and  appearances  really  producing  architecture  —  that  is  to 
say  the  visible  form;  solution  of  the  problems  met,  by  the  natural 
laws  of  statics,  of  equilibrium  of  forces  and  by  the  employment  of 
materials  in  the  ratio  of  their  properties ;  acceptance  of  all  pro- 
grammes, whatever  may  be  their  variety  and  subjection  of  the  con- 
struction to  these  programmes,  consequently  of  the  architecture 
itself,  since  this  architecture  is  only  the  frankly-admitted  appearance 
of  this  construction.  Having  meditated  on  these  principles,  having 
chosen  some  examples  among  the  applications  of  these  principles, 
there  is  no  architect  who  cannot  construct,  as  did  these  mediaeval 
masters,  proceed  as  they  did  and  vary  forms  in  proportion  to  the 
new  necessities  which  perpetually  arise  in  a  society  like  ours,  since 
each  new  need  should  provoke  a  new  application  of  principles.  If 
we  should  be  accused  of  wishing  to  cause  our  art  to  retrograde,  it 
would  be  well,  at  least,  to  have  it  understood  in  what  manner  we 
intend  to  pull  it  backwards  ;  the  conclusion  of  all  that  we  have  said 
being  :  "  Be  true."  '  If  truth  is  a  sign  of  barbarity,  of  ignorance, 
we  shall  be  happy  to  be  classed  with  those  who  are  barbarous  and 
ignorant  and  proud  to  have  drawn  some  of  our  confreres  with  us. 

Corbels  play  an  important  role  in  civil  constructions.  We  have 
previously  given  the  reason ;  it  remains  for  us  to  follow  the  varied 
applications  of  this  method.  There  are,  in  that  portion  of  Cham- 
pagne which  touches  Burgundy,  and  vice  versa,  houses  otherwise 
very  simple,  constructed  during  the  thirteenth  and  fourteenth  cen- 
turies, which  have  a  gable  toward  the  street  and  form  on  the  exterior 
a  sort  of  porch  with  balcony  above,  sheltered  by  a  strongly-projecting 


320 


CIVIL  CONSTRUCTION. 


roof.  The  entire  system  consists  merely  of  cleverly-combined 
corbels.  Thus  (134)  the  side  walls  carry  a  first  corbelling  at  right 
angles  to  them,  intended  to  carry  a  bressumraer  receiving  the  ends 


Fig.  134. 

of  the  second-story  floor-beams  which  also  bear  upon  the  recessed 
wall.  This  bressummer  is  surmounted  by  a  balustrade.  A  second 
corbelling  A  gives  a  projection  to  the  side  walls  which  protects  the 


CONSTRUCTION. 


321 


balcony  and  receives  a  gable 
truss  whose  tie-beam  carries 
the  flooring  of  the  garret  and 
permits  the  introduction  of 
provisions  into  it.  The 
recessed  enclosure  on  the  line 
of  the  first-story  wall  is  only 
a  framing  of  wood  roughly 
plastered.     Notice  that  the 
second  corbelling  .4  (134a) 
carries  above  its  last  course 
H,  a  portion  of  vertical  wall 
H  I,  so  as  to  weight  the  ends 
of  the  corbelled  stones  by  a 
mass  of  masonry.  Further 
back  is  the  wood  framing  G, 
which  closes  the  second  story. 
To  avoid  any  chance  of  the 
corbelled  mass  rocking,  the 
double  plates  N,  which  carry 
the  roof,  and  which  sur- 
mount the  whole  length  of 
the  side  walls,  are  furnished 
on  the   outside  with  strong 
key-pins  O,  which  maintain 
the  head  of  the  corbelling. 
This  very  simple  arrange- 
ment is  found  in  very  many 
peasants'  dwellings.    But  we 
will  now  see  how  the  con- 
structors reached  the  point 
of  using  corbellings  with  skill 
in  richer,  more  complicated, 
more  important  structures, 


322 


CIVIL  CONSTRUCTION. 


while  submitting  themselves  to  dispositions  demanded  by  a  special 
requirement. 

The  problem  is  to  pierce  a  doorway  in  the  re-entrant  angle, 
formed  by  two  buildings  which  meet  at  right  angles,  a  very  con- 
venient arrangement,  moreover,  and  which  was  frequently  insisted 

upon  by  the  inhabitants  of  a 
manor  or  a  dwelling;  to 
arrange  that  this  door  shall 
give  access  to  the  ground- 
floor  rooms  on  the  right  and 
left,  then  to  the  second  story ; 
to  overcome  the  splay  in 
which  the  door  is  cut,  to 
recover  the  right  angle 
formed  by  the  meeting  of  the 
main  walls,  of  which  at  least 
one  will  make  a  partition  wall 
as  it  is  prolonged ;  and  to 
then  establish  above  this  door 
and  in  the  re-entrant  angle, 
a  service  staircase  connecting 
the  second  story  with  the 
upper  stories.  By  the  use  of 
iron  beams  covered  with 
plaster  we  should  to-day  easily 
succeed  in  satisfying  this  pro- 
gramme. But  if  it  is  required 
not  to  falsify  the  construction, 
the  thing  becomes  less  easy.  Let  (135)  be  the  plan  A  of  the  ground- 
floor  of  this  construction,  and  plan  B  the  second  story.  At  C  is 
shown  the  door  which  opens  in  the  splayed  wall ;  at  D  the  interior 
piers ;  at  E  the  horizontal  projection  of  the  interior  corbels  support- 
ing the  re-entrant  angle  and  at  F  the  horizontal  projection  of  the 


Fig.  13  5. 


CONSTRUCTION.  323 

corbellings  carrying  the  salient  angle  ;  G  G  are  the  arches  counter- 
butting  the  re-entrant  angle,  and  carrying  the  second-story  partition 


Fig.  136. 

walls.  We  show  (136)  the  exterior  view  of  the  doorway  with  the 
corbellings  which  act  as  a  hood  for  it,  and  which  carry  the  salient 

I 


324 


CIVIL  CONSTRUCTION. 


angle  of  the  service  staircase  shown  on  the  second-story  floor-plan  B. 
If  necessary,  these  corbellings  may  mask  machicolations  for  defending 
the  doorway.    Figure  137  gives  the  interior  view  of  the  doorway 


Fig.  137. 

with  the  corbellings  carrying  the  re-entrant  angle ;  at  G  are  the  two 
arches  counterbutting  the  corbellings  and  supporting  the  partition 
walls  above.  The  newel  of  the  staircase  ascends  in  the  centre  H  of 
the  splayed  wall  and  the  interior  and  exterior  corbellings  are  kept 


CONSTRUCTION. 


325 


in  equilibrium  by  the  opposing  weights  of  the  two  salient  angles  of 
this  staircase  well.  It  has  been  attempted  in  later  times  to  obtain 
analogous  results  by  means  of  pendentives  ;  but  pendentives  load 
the  masonry  below  much  more  than  this  system  of  corbellings; 
require  larger-sized  materials  and  a  greater  amount  of  them  ;  and 
problems  in  stereotomy,  difficult  to  plot  and  still  more  difficult  of 
execution.  This  then  is  no  progress  at  all,  unless  one  considers  it 
progress  to  give  pleasure  to  a  stone-cutter ;  to  show  his  knowledge 
to  the  detriment  of  the  purse  of  him  who  builds. 

If  during  the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth  centuries  the  ecclesiastical 
constructions  modified  but  little,  the  methods  applied  to  the  art  of 
building  by  the  architects  of  the  thirteenth  century,  it  is  not  the 
same  with  civic  constructions.  These  take  on  a  freer  manner ; 
the  processes  are  more  elaborate,  the  methods  more  varied ;  the 
architects  show  proof  of  that  independence  of  which  they  show 
the  lack  in  the  religious  monuments.  This  is  in  reality  because  the 
current  of  life  turned  away  from  religious  architecture  and  bent  all 
its  energy  to  civil  constructions.  Under  the  reigns  of  Charles  V 
and  of  Charles  VI,  there  is  a  rapid  development  of  architecture 
applied  to  public  edifices,  to  castles  and  to  mansions.  No  difficulty 
daunts  the  constructor  and  he  succeeds  by  carrying  further  the 
principles  admitted  by  his  predecessors  in  executing  constructions 
the  most  daring  and  the  most  skilful  from  the  double  point-of-view 
of  solidity  and  art.  At  that  epoch  a  few  seigneurs  knew  how  to  give 
an  extraordinary  impulse  to  constructions ;  they  loved  them  as  they 
should  be  loved,  leaving  to  the  artist  perfect  freedom,  both  in  regard 
to  the  methods  of  execution  and  the  character  which  fitted  each 
structure.1 

1  Nothing  strikes  us  as  worse  and  more  ridiculous  than  to  wish,  as  happens 
only  too  frequently  nowadays,  to  impose  on  architects  something  else  than 
programmes  ;  nothing  gives  a  more  gloomy  idea  of  the  state  of  the  arts  and 
those  who  profess  them,  than  to  see  artists  accept  all  the  extravagances  imposed 
hy  persons  ignorant  of  practice,  under  the  pretext  that  they  pay  the  bills. 
Tailors  have,  on  this  score,  more  moral  courage  than  many  architects  ;  for  a 


326 


CIVIL  CONSTRUCTION. 


The  Duke  of  Burgundy  and  the  Duke  Louis  of  Orleans,  the 
brother  of  Charles  VI,  caused  to  be  raised  residences,  half  fortress, 
half  palace,  which  indicate  in  the  artists  charged  with  these  works 
a  rare  experience  and  knowledge  and  perfect  taste  ;  and  in  the 
seigneurs,  who  ordered  these  works,  a  wise  and  intelligent  liberality 
which  has  hardly  been,  since  that  time,  a  peculiarity  of  persons 
sufficiently  rich  and  powerful  to  undertake  great  works. 

If  Louis,  Duke  of  Orleans,  was  a  great  spendthrift  of  public  funds 
and  if  he  abused  the  state  of  madness  into  which  the  King,  his 
brother,  had  fallen,  it  must  be  admitted  that,  in  the  capacity  of  a 
wealthy  seigneur,  he  built  like  a  man  of  taste.  It  was  he  who 
rebuilt  almost  entirely  the  Chateau  of  Coucy,  who  built  those  of 
Pierrefonds  and  Ferte-Milon,  and  greatly  enlarged  those  of  Crepy 
and  Bethisy.    All  the  buildings  undertaken  by  order  of  this  prince 

good  tailor  will  say,  if  one  orders  a  ridiculous  coat :  "  I  cannot  make  you  a  gar- 
ment which  will  disgrace  my  house  and  which  will  make  a  laughing-stock  of 
you." 

This  evil  dates  sufficiently  far  hack,  for  our  good  Philihert  Delorme  wrote 
about  1575 : 

"  I  desire  to  inform  you,  that  for  thirty-five  years  gone,  and  more,  I  have 
"  observed  in  diverse  places,  that  the  major  part  of  those  who  have  made  or  desire 
il  to  make  edifices,  have  begun  them  even  so  hastily  as  they  have  lightly  consid- 
"  ered  of  them  :  thereby  has  resulted  most  often  repentance  and  derision,  which 
"  always  follow  those  ill-advised  :  in  such  wise,  that  they  who  think  to  understand 
"  truly  that  which  they  would  do,  have  required  the  contrary  of  that  which  was 
' '  possible  and  ought,  indeed,  to  be  done.  And  if  by  good  chance  they  sought  from 
"  someone  advice  touching  their  resolve  and  undertaking,  it  was  a  master-mason, 
"or  master-carpenter,  as  one  is  wont  to  do,  or  perhaps  some  painter,  some 
"  notary,  or  others  who  hold  themselves  for  well-informed,  and  for  the  generality 
"haye  hardly  better  judgment  and  counsel  than  those  who  ask  it  from  them  — 
"  oftentimes  likewise  I  have  seen  great  personages  who  have  deceived  themselves, 
"  for  as  much  as  the  most  part  of  those  who  are  about  them,  never  wishing  to 
"  gainsay  them  or  desiring  to  please  them,  or  indeed,  because  they  themselves 
"  lack  understanding,  answer  straightway  with  the  words,  'It  is  well  said,  my  lord; 
"  it  is  a  fine  invention,  it  is  very  well  imagined,  and  shows  truly  that  you  have  an 
"  excellent  understanding ;  never  will  such  another  work  be  seen  in  the  world.'  But 
"  the  flatterers  think  quite  otherwise,  and  talk  of  it  behind  his  back,  or  perhaps 
"  elsewhere.  In  this  wise  many  seigneurs  cheat  themselves  and  are  satisfied  with 
"  their  achievements." 

We  might  go  on  and  cite  in  extenso  the  six  first  chapters  of  the  treatise  of 
Philibert  Delorme ;  we  refer  our  readers  to  it  as  a  masterpiece  of  good  sense, 
of  wisdom  and  probity. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


327 


Fig.  138. 

are  of  rare  finish  and  rare  beauty.  There  will  be  found  there  what 
are  so  difficult  to  unite  in  one  and  the  same  building,  perfect 


328 


CIVIL  CONSTRUCTION. 


solidity,  strength,  elegance  and  that  tasteful  splendor  which  leaves 
nothing  to  caprice.  From  this  point-of-view  the  buildings  of  Coucy, 
raised  about  1400,  have  all  the  majesty  of  Roman  buildings  and  all 
the  charm  of  the  most  delicate  designs  of  the  Renaissance.  Apart 
from  the  style  peculiar  to  the  epoch  we  have  to  recognize  in  the 
architects  of  this  time  a  more  marked  superiority  in  construction 
over  those  of  the  sixteenth  century  ;  their  conceptions  are  broader 
and  their  processes  are  more  certain  and  more  wise  ;  they  knew 
better  how  to  subordinate  details  to  the  whole  and  how  to  build 
more  solidly.  The  great  Hall  of  the  Chateau  of  Coucy,  called  the 
Salle  des  Preux  (Hall  of  the  Nine  Worthies)  is  a  perfect  work ;  we 
can  here  show  only  some  parts  which  relate  to  the  subject  matter  of 
this  article. 

This  Hall,  in  the  second  story,  is  above  a  ground  floor  whose 
vaults  rest  upon  a  row  of  columns  and  the  lateral  wall.  It  is  not 
less  than  16  metres  -wide  and  60  metres  long  ;  that  is  to  say,  it  can 
easily  hold  2,000  persons.  On  one  side,  its  windows  open  on  the 
country  through  the  thick  curtain  walls  of  the  chateau ;  on 
the  other  side,  on  the  interior  court.  Two  enormous  double  chim- 
neys warm  it  and  the  side  windows  are  six  in  number,  three  on  the 
outer  side  and  three  on  the  court,  without  counting  an  immense 
window  to  the  south,  opening  under  the  soffite  of  the  vaulted  wooden 
roof.  The  side  windows  are  also  surmounted  by  dormer  windows 
in  the  roof.  We  give  (138)  a  section  of  this  hall  taken  through  one 
of  the  side  windows  with  the  dormer  above  it,  and  (139)  an  interior 
perspective  of  this  same  window  which  has  not  less  than  four  metres 
opening.  The  flat  arch  which  spans  it  is  built  of  ten  voussoirs  set 
with  great  care  which,  held  in  place  by  the  curtain  wall,  fully  four 
metres  thick,  have  remained  horizontal  without  any  iron  framework. 
In  the  perspective  view  we  have  supposed  the  roof  removed  at  A, 
so  as  to  show  from  the  interior  the  construction  of  the  dormer 
window.  These  dormer  windows  (see  the  section)  open  on  the 
broad  chemin  de  ronde  (footway  behind  the  battlements)  so  that 


CONSTRUCTION. 


329 


Fig.  139. 


330 


CIVIL  CONSTRUCTION. 


at  need,  the  soldiers  posted  in  this  footway  could  speak  to  the 
persons  in  the  hall.  The  defenders  were  sheltered  under  a  little 
roof  supported  by  the  battlements  and  isolated  piers  A.  Daylight, 
then,  entered  the  hall  through  the  dormer  windows  without  hin- 
drance and  this  construction  is  on  so  great  a  scale  that  from  B  in  the 
hall,  one  could  not  see  the  top  of  the  roof  of  the  chemin  de  ronde  as 
is  shown  by  the  dotted  line  BC1. 

No  trace  of  the  roof  remains  and  nothing  is  found  to  day  of  all 
this  noble  construction,  except  the  windows  and  the  lower  part  of 
the  dormers,  which  are  enough,  however,  to  give  an  idea  of  the 
stately  arrangements.  In  the  hall  of  the  Salle  des  Preuses  (hall  of 
the  Female  Worthies)  in  the  same  chateau,  are  still  to  be  seen 
windows  which  are  vaulted  as  shown  in  Figure  140,  so  as  to  support 
a  considerable  load  of  masonry.  The  skewbacks  of  the  double  dis- 
charging arches  project  over  the  splay  as  far  as  the  impost  A  of  the 
window  (see  the  plan),  so  as  to  avoid  warped  surfaces  in  the  vous- 
soirs  whose  soffits  are  thus  made  parallel.  The  upper  arch  alone 
shows  on  the  outer  face  of  the  wall  and  completely  relieves  the 
lintel. 

It  is  understood,  of  course,  that  the  constructors  employed  these 

powerful  methods  only  in  buildings  of  importance,  less  calculated  to 

resist  Time's  ravages  than  the  destructive  contrivances  of  men.  It 

seems  even  that  the  interiors  of  chateaux  where  there  was  no  fear 

of  an  attack,  the  architects  had  tried  to  divert  the  occupants'  eyes 

by  very  elegant  and  dainty  forms.    We  know  that  Charles  V  had 

built  in  the  Louvre,  at  Paris,  a  staircase  and  galleries  which  passed 

for  masterpieces  of  the  builders'  art,  and  which  compelled  the 

admiration  of  all  connoisseurs  up  to  the  time  when  these  precious 

edifices  were  destroyed.    Staircases  in  particular,  which  present 

innumerable  difficulties  to  builders,  excite  the  emulation  of  mediaeval 

1  These  great  halls  were  habitually  floored  with  flags  ;  they  were  washed  every 
day  and  gargoyles  were  arranged  to  carry  off  the  water.  "  The  blood  of  the 
victims  ran  away  on  every  side  and  poured  out  by  the  openings  (rigel-stein)  left 
near  the  sills  of  the  doors  "  (Nibelungen  Lied). 


CONSTRUCTION. 


331 


architects.  There  was  no  seigneur  who  did  not  wish  to  have  a 
degre  more  elegant  and  better  designed  than  that  of  his  neighbor 
and,  in  fact,  the  little  that  remains  to  us  of  these  indispensable 
accessories  of  chateaux  always  indicates  a  certain  pretension  as  well 
as  great  ability  in  draughting.    (See  Escalier). 


Fig.  140. 

For  the  more  modest  dwellings  of  townspeople  as  well,  the  con- 
struction becomes  during  the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth  centuries, 
lighter,  more  studied.  It  is  then  that  they  commence  to  want  very 
large  windows  on  the  public  highway,  still  more  necessary  because 
the  streets  were  narrow  ;  they  adroitly  combine  wood  with  stone  or 


332 


CIVIL  CONSTRUCTION. 


brick  ;  they  endeavor  to  save  room  in  interiors  by  diminishing  the 
supports  and  by  encroaching  upon  the  public  highway  with  projec- 
tions of  the  upper  stories ;  so  that  as  a  consequence,  constructors 
had  to  return  to  timber-framing  for  their  fronts. 

We  do  not  wish  to  unduly  extend  this  article,  already  long  enough, 
or  to  include  here  examples,  which  properly  belong  to  other  sections 
in  this  Dictionary ;  we  have  endeavored  merely  to  indicate  the 
profound  differences  separating  civil  from  religious  construction  in 
the  Middle  Ages.  Our  readers  will  do  well  to  refer  for  more  ample 
details  to  the  words :  Boutique,  Charpente,  Cheneau,  Egout,  Esca- 
lier,  Fenetre,  Fontaine,  Galerie,  Maison,  Pan-de-Bois,  Plancher, 
Pont,  Porte,  etc. 


CHAPTER  X. 


Military  Constructions. 

COMPARING  the  military  constructions  of  the  beginning  of  the 
Middle  Ages  and  those  of  the  Romans,  there  is  to  be  noted  only 
a  somewhat  decreased  perfection  in  the  use  of  materials  and  the 
execution ;  the  processes  are  the  same ;  the  curtain  walls  and  the 
towers  are  merely  composed  of  masses  of  rubble  work,  protected 
with  a  facing  of  small  stones  either  rough  or  sparely  dressed.  It 
seems  that  the  Normans  were  the  first  to  introduce  certain  improve- 
ments in  military  works  unknown  before  their  time,  and  which 
from  the  eleventh  century  on  give  to  these  constructions  a  marked 
superiority  over  those  which  existed  in  Eastern  Europe.  The  most 
notable  among  these  improvements  was  the  rapidity  with  which  they 
erected  their  strongholds.  William  the  Conqueror  covered  Eng- 
land and  a  part  of  Normandy  in  a  very  few  years  with  strongholds 
built  of  masonry  executed  with  perfect  solidity  which  is  attested  by 
the  great  number  of  them  still  standing. 

It  is  to  be  supposed  that  the  Normans  established  on  Western  soil 
the  methods  in  use  by  the  Romans,  that  is  to  say,  requisitions  for 
building  their  fortresses  and  this  is,  indeed,  in  a  completely  subju- 
gated country,  the  best  method  of  raising  massive  structures  re- 
quiring only  large  amounts  of  materials  and  many  hands.  There  is 
to  be  found,  in  short,  in  the  primitive  military  constructions  of  the 
Normans  no  trace  of  art ;  everything  is  sacrificed  to  the  prime  need 


334 


MILITARY  CONSTRUCTIONS. 


of  defence.  Buildings  of  this  sort  furnish  no  material  for  analysis ; 
they  have  no  interest  for  us,  except  from  the  defensive  point-of- 
view,  and  in  this  aspect  their  particularities  are  described  in  the 
articles,  Architecture  militaire,  Chateau,  Donjon,  Tour. 

It  is  scarcely  before  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century  that  we  find 
special  methods  of  construction  applied  to  defensive  works,  forming 
an  art  by  itself.  For  masses  of  rubble-work  offering  equal  and 
continuous  resistance,  are  substituted  supports  united  by  discharging 
arches,  and  thus  forming  in  the  curtain-walls  as  well  as  in  the  towers 
some  parts  more  resistant  than  others,  each  independent  of  the 
other,  so  as  to  avoid  the  fall  of  large  portions  of  the  masonry  if  they 
were  undermined.  It  is  about  this  time  also  they  attached  great 
importance  to  the  site  of  military  works,  that  constructors  chose 
rocky  soils  difficult  to  undermine,  and  that  they  frequently  benched 
out  the  rock  in  order  to  obtain  indestructible  escarpments,  for  during 
the  grand  sieges  undertaken  at  this  epoch,  notably  by  Philip 
Augustus,  sapping  and  mining  were  the  means  most  often  employed 
for  overthrowing  walls.    (See  Siege.) 

One  of  the  bas-reliefs  which  decorate  the  western  facade  of 
Notre-Dame-la-Grande  at  Poitiers,  which  dates  from  the  commence- 
ment of  the  twelfth  century,  shows  us  already  city  walls,  composed 
of  discharging  arches  carried  by  slightly  projecting  exterior  but- 
tresses (141).  But  it  is  not  necessary  to  stop  too  long  over  these 
representations  of  monuments  which  do  not  always  conform  to 
reality.  The  discharging  arches  when  they  exist  habitually  appear 
on  the  interior  of  the  walls  to  carry  the  chemin  de  ronde  and 
masked  by  the  exterior  facing.  Common  sense  would,  in  fact, 
indicate  that  discharging  arches  on  the  exterior  would  mark  to 
besiegers  the  point  where  they  should  begin  to  undermine,  and  that 
the  projection  of  the  buttresses  would  hide  the  advance  guard.  The 
above  examples  should  therefore  be  considered  as  the  reverse  of  the 
wall  used  on  account  of  necessities  of  sculptural  decoration. 

The  intelligence  which  we  see  displayed  by  the  French  constructors 


CONSTRUCTION.  335 

toward  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century  in  religious  and  civil  edifices 
is  also  found  in  military  edifices  ;  they  endeavor  to  replace  the 
passive  forces  of  Roman  construction  by  active  forces  ;  but  military 
architecture  is  concerned  not  alone  with  existing  exterior  agencies 


Fig.  141. 

and  the  natural  laws  of  gravity  ;  it  has  to  offer  resistance  to  the 
destructive  hands  of  men. 

The  logic  of  the  artists  who  develop  the  art  of  architecture  in  the 
Middle  Ages  and  raise  it  out  of  the  Romanesque  rut,  is  rigorous ; 


336 


MILITARY  CONSTRUCTIONS. 


we  have  had  occasion  to  demonstrate  this  to  our  readers  in  the  first 
two  parts  of  this  article.  It  will  be  understood  that  this  logical  and 
truthful  spirit  found  a  fine  chance  to  exercise  itself  in  the  construc- 
tion of  military  edifices,  where  everything  must  be  sacrificed  to  the 
necessity  of  defence.  Sapping  and  mining  carried  out  by  means  of 
a  system  of  shoring,  which  was  set  on  fire,  being  the  most  ordinary 


Fig.  142. 

principle  of  attack  in  the  twelfth  century,  it  was  necessary  to  oppose 
this  system  by  a  principle  capable  of  rendering  futile  the  works  of 
the  assailants.  If,  then  (142),  we  construct  a  tower  on  the  plan  A, 
and  if  the  miners  succeed  in  attacking  it,  in  two  adjacent  points  of 
the  exterior  face,  and  make  the  two  cavities  B  C  shoring  them  with 
small  struts,  when  they  set  these  struts  on  fire,  all  the  portion  E  F 


CONSTRUCTION. 


337 


of  the  tower  will  fall  outside  and  the  work  will  be  destroyed  ;  but 
if,  using  the  same  cubic  quantity  of  materials  and  covering  the  same 
superficies,  we  take  the  trouble  to  build  in  place  of  a  solid  wall  a 
series  of  niches  included  between  interior  buttresses  as  plan  G 
indicates,  there  is  an  even  chance  that  the  miner  will  happen  upon  a 
void  instead  of  a  solid,  and  then  his  plan  of  burning  struts  will  pro- 
duce no  results ;  but  if  he  hits  upon  a  solid  wall  this  will  offer  him  a 
greater  thickness  than  in  the  plan  A,  and  his  work  will  be  longer  and 
more  difficult;  in  addition,  the  recesses  H  allow  of  countermining,  if 
he  works  below  these  niches.  In  addition,  the  niches  H  themselves 
can  be  shored  on  the  inside,  so  as  to  make  the  fall  of  a  part  of  the 
tower  impossible,  even  admitting  that  the  excavations  of  the  mine 
have  been  made  at  i",  and  at  K  underneath  the  piers.  Thus  as  early 
as  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century  with  a  cubical  quantity  of  mate- 
rials equal  to  that  previously  employed  and  even  a  less  quantity,  the 
military  constructors  had  succeeded  in  giving  a  much  stronger 
foundation  to  their  works.  In  addition,  the  constructors  buried  in 
the  thickness  of  the  walls  tough  pieces  of  wood  bolted  together  with 
iron  so  as  to  encircle  their  towers  at  different  levels.  The  principle 
was  excellent  but  the  method  very  bad ;  for  these  pieces  of  wood 
completely  deprived  of  air,  rapidly  dried  and  rotted.  Later  they 
noticed  the  rapid  destruction  of  wood  so  used  and  replaced  it  by  a 
system  of  anchors  made  of  iron  cramps  built  in  between  two  courses 
(see  Chainage). 

There  is  one  observation  which  might  occur  to  any  one  and  which 
is  not  devoid  of  interest.  The  mortars  generally  employed  during 
the  twelfth  century  and  the  beginning  of  the  thirteenth,  in  churches 
and  most  religious  constructions  are  bad,  wanting  in  body,  imper- 
fectly mixed  and  frequently  even  the  sand  itself  gives  out  and  seems 
to  have  been  replaced  by  stone  dust;  while  the  mortars  employed  in 
military  constructions  at  this  epoch,  as  well  as  before  and  after,  are 
excellent  and  are  frequently  as  good  as  Roman  mortars  ;  the  same 
may  be  said  of  materials.    The  stones  employed  in  the  fortifications 


338 


MILITARY  CONSTRUCTIONS. 


are  of  a  superior  quality,  well  chosen  and  worked  in  large  masses; 
they  emphasize  by  contrast  great  negligence  or  painful  economy  in 
the  greater  part  of  religious  constructions. 

Evidently  the  lay  noblemen  when  they  built  fortresses  had  kept 
the  Roman  method  of  requisitions  and  apportionments  which  the 
abbots  and  bishops  were  unable  or  unwilling  to  maintain.  It  would 
seem  that  the  Norman  seigneurs  were  the  first  to  reorganize  the  build- 
ing system  employed  by  the  Romans,  1  and  their  example  has  been 
followed  in  all  the  northern  and  western  provinces.  Enthusiasm 
produces  great  things,  but  it  is  of  short  duration.  A  sentiment  of 
reaction  against  barbarism  caused  the  erection  of  abbey  churches 
and  the  vast  constructions  surrounding  them ;  a  desire  for  liberty 
and  an  awakening  of  faith  brought  about  the  building  of  cathedrals 
(see  Cathedrale)  ;  but  these  moments  of  effervescence  past,  abbots 
and  bishops  found  only  a  cold  devotion  left ;  hence  negligence  or 
scamping  in  the  doing  of  work.  With  the  lay  nobility  it  could  not 
be  thus  ;  the  peasants  were  not  asked  for  devoutness,  they  were 
required  to  do  regular  tasks  under  rigid  supervision.  This  method  was 
certainly  the  better  one  for  the  regular  prosecution  of  considerable 
undertakings.  So  we  ought  not  to  be  surprised  at  the  hatred  which 
has  been  transmitted  among  us  from  generation  to  generation  against 
the  feudal  fortresses  and  the  affection  for  their  cathedrals  which  the 
people  have  retained  through  these  hundreds  of  years.  At  the  end  of 
the  last  century  it  is  true  that  many  churches  were  destroyed,  more 
particularly  conventual  churches  —  because  these  belonged  to  feudal 
establishments ;  but  not  many  cathedrals  have  been  destroyed,  while 
all  the  chateaux,  without  exception,  have  been  devastated — many, 
even,  had  been  ruined  under  Louis  XIII  and  Louis  XIV.  1  So  far  as 
we,  constructors,  are  concerned,  we  have  only  to  state  here  facts, 

1  In  Normandy  there  existed  during  the  Middle  Ages  a  class  of  peasants  called 
by  the  general  name  of  Bordiers.  These  Bordiers  were  compelled  to  do  the 
hardest  sorts  of  work  —  among  others  —  those  connected  with  the  building,  such 
as  the  transport  of  materials,  terracing,  etc.;  in  other  words  they  were  masons' 
helpers.  (See  Etud.  sur  la  condit.  de  la  classe  agric.  en  Normandie  au  moyen  age, 
par  Leop.   Delisle,  1351,  p.  15,  20,  79,  83,  and  notes  p.  709. ) 


CONSTRUCTION. 


339 


from  which  each  one  can  draw  conclusions  in  accordance  with  his 
own  manner  of  looking  at  things  ;  we  are  obliged  to  admit  that  from 
the  point-of-view  of  workmanship,  there  are  found  in  the  fortresses 
of  the  Middle  Ages,  uniformity  and  sureness  of  execution,  a  regu- 
lated progression  and  an  attention  which  are  wanting  in  many  of 
our  religious  edifices. 

In  the  construction  of  churches  there  may  be  noticed  interrup- 
tions, boggling,  frequent  modifications  in  the  original  projects,  which 
are  to  be  explained  by  lack  of  money,  more  or  less  flagging  zeal  of 
Bishops,  Canons  or  Abbots,  new  ideas  which  crowded  into  the  brains 
of  those  who  ordered  and  paid  for  the  work.  All  that  is  benevo- 
lently laid  to  the  account  of  the  ignorance  of  the  master- workman, 
the  inefficiency  of  their  methods.1 

But  when  a  powerful  seigneur  wished  to  build  a  fortress  he  was 
not  reduced  to  solicit  gifts  from  his  vassals,  to  kindle  the  zeal  of  the 
lukewarm  and  to  rely  on  time  and  his  successors  to  complete  that 
which  he  begins.  He  wished  his  chateau  in  his  lifetime  ;  his  need 
was  pressing,  immediate.  Richard  Coeur-de-Lion  stopped  for  noth- 
ing when  he  wished  to  build  the  fortress  of  Andelis,  the  Chateau 
Gaillard  —  neither  usurpations  nor  sacrifices,  nor  coercion,  nor  money ; 
he  proceeded  to  build  the  stronghold  in  spite  of  the  Archbishop  of 
Rouen,  although  the  City  of  Andeli  belonged  to  him.  Normandy  is 
put  under  the  ban  at  the  instigation  of  the  King  of  France.  The 
affair  is  carried  up  to  the  Pope  who  decrees  a  fine  in  favor  of  the 
prelate  and  raises  the  ban.  But  during  these  protestations,  these 
menaces,  these  discussions,  Richard  does  not  lose  a  day ;  he  is  on 
the  spot  overseeing  and  spurring  on  the  workmen ;  his  fortress  rises, 
and  in  a&ear  it  is  done  and  well  done  —  the  scarp  and  the  moats 
finished,  the  place  in  a  complete  state  of  defense  and  one  of  the 
strongest  of  the  North  of  France.  When  Enguerrand  III  built 
the  Chateau  of  Coucy,  it  was  in  preparation  for  an  approaching  and 

1  For  instance,  it  is  always  impressed  upon  us  that  such  a  cathedral  was  two 
centuries  in  huihling,  without  taking  into  account  that  out  of  these  two  hundred 
years  they  actually  worked  only  ten  or  twenty  years. 


340 


MILITARY  CONSTRUCTIONS. 


terrible  struggle  with  his  suzerain.  A  month  of  delay  might  frus- 
trate his  ambitious  projects  —  hence  even  to-day  it  is  evident  that 
the  enormous  works  carried  out  by  his  orders  were  prosecuted  with 
a  surprising  rapidity  —  a  rapidity  that  brooks  no  negligence.  From 
base  to  summit  the  same  materials,  the  same  mortar,  even  more,  the 
same  workmen's  marks  were  there  ;  we  have  counted  more  than  a 
hundred  of  them  on  the  faces  which  are  still  visible.  Now  each 
workman's  mark  belongs  to  one  particular  stone-cutter,  as  is  the  case 
to-day  in  Burgundy,  in  Auvergne,  in  the  department  of  Lyons.1 

A  hundred  stone-cutters  to-day  give  the  following  proportions  of 
the  other  trades,  on  the  bases  of  a  construction  like  that  of  Enguer- 
rand  III : 


Stonecutters   100 

Draughtsmen,  ) 

Fitters,  V   20 

Blacksmiths,  ) 
Mason's  laborers,  i 

Derrickmen,  >   100 

Setters,  ) 
Graders,  i 

Laborers,  \  200 

Mortar  mixers,  J 

Masons  and  helpers  200 

To  supply  the  work-yards  : 

Quarrymen  and  lime-burners   100 

Sand-diggers    25 

Teamsters  and  helpers   50 


795 

say  in  round  numbers  eight  hundred  (800). 
Eight  hundred  workmen  occupied  entirely  with  masonry,  pre- 
suppose an  almost  equal  number  of  carpenters,  iron-workers,  plumb- 
ers, tile-layers,  paviors,  cabinet-makers  and  painters  (for  all  the 
inside  work  of  the  Chateau  of  Coucy  was  painted  on  fresh  plaster). 
We  must  then  admit  that  there  were  at  least  sixteen  bunded  work- 
men busied  in  the  construction  of  this  fortress.  If  we  examine  the 
edifice,  the  uniform  way  in  which  the  work  is  gotten  out  and  set, 


1  The  marks  cut  on  the  exposed  faces  by  the  stone-cutters  were  made  to  allow 
the  foreman  to  keep  track  of  each  one's  work;  these  marks  prove  that  the  work 
was  paid  for  by  the  piece,  by  the  job  and  not  by  the  day  (see  Corporation);  still 
further  they  indicate  the  number  of  workmen  employed,  for  each  had  his  own. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


341 


the  perfect  unity  of  the  conception  in  ensemble  and  details,  the  uni- 
formity of  profiles,  show  a  promptness  of  execution  which  rivals  that 
which  we  see  done  to-day.  Such  activity  resulting  in  so  perfect  a 
structure  is  found  only  by  exception  in  religious  constructions,  as, 
for  instance,  the  facade  of  Notre-Dame  at  Paris,  in  the  substructure 
of  the  Cathedral  at  Rheiins,  in  the  nave  of  the  Cathedral  of  Amiens. 
But  these  are  only  special  cases,  while  in  the  fortresses  of  the 


Fig.  143. 

Middle  Ages,  from  the  twelfth  to  the  fifteenth  centuries,  the  traces 
of  this  haste  may  always  be  found  at  the  same  time  with  an  excellent 
execution,  well-conceived  plans,  studied  details — no  hesitation,  no 
experiments. 

Let  us  take,  for  example,  one  of  the  corner  towers  of  the  Chateau 
of  Coucy,  each  of  which  are  fifteen  metres  in  diameter  over  all,  not 
including  the  lower  weatherings.     Each  of  these  towers  has  five 


342 


MILITARY  CONSTRUCTIONS. 


stories  in  addition  to  the  roof.  The  lower  story,  whose  floor  is  a 
little  above  the  exterior  grade,  is  vaulted  in  cupola  form  between 
walls  whose  thickness  is  about  3.50  metres  beside  the  weathering. 
Above  this  story,  which  is  nothing  but  a  cellar  intended  for  provi- 
sions, rises  a  story  hexagonal  within  and  vaulted  with  transverse 
arches. 

The  other  stories  are  floored  over.  Figure  143  shows  the  super- 
posed plans  of  the  stories  above  the  cellar.  The  piers  of  the  hexagon 
are  alternately  placed,  solids  over  voids,  so  that  in  perspective 
section  we  see  that  the  abutments  are  built  over  the  keys  of  the 
arches  in  tierce-point,  forming  niches  between  the  piers  as  shown  in 
Figure  144.  This  construction  avoids  the  weakening  which  ordi- 
narily occurs  in  a  cylinder  enclosing  niches  placed  one  above  another ; 
it  also  admits  piercing  loop-holes  over-lapping  one  another  and  com- 
manding all  points  of  the  horizon.  We  assume  the  vaulting  of  the 
lower  story  above  the  cellar  to  be  suppressed,  in  order  to  show  the 
general  effect  of  the  construction.    Access  to  this  cellar  was  had 

o 

only  bv  the  circular  opening  pierced  at  the  summit  of  the  vault.  It 
is  easily  seen  that  such  a  construction,  resting  upon  a  solid  founda- 
tion and  a  lower  story  with  very  thick  cylindrical  walls  and  rein- 
forced by  an  exterior  talus,  buttressed  at  each  story  by  over-lapping 
piers,  ought  to  bid  defiance  to  all  the  efforts  of  the  sapper ;  for,  in 
order  to  overthrow  a  tower  thus  built,  it  would  have  been  necessary 
to  undermine  half  of  its  diameter,  not  an  easy  task  at  the  top  of  an 
escarpment  and  in  the  face  of  a  garrison  commanding  subterranean 
issues  to  the  outworks. 

Let  us  now  examine  the  construction  of  the  Keep  of  Coucy,  built 
by  Enguerrand  III,  about  1225.  It  is  a  cylinder  of  more  than  thirty 
metres  over  all  with  a  height  of  sixty  metres.  It  comprises  three 
vaulted  stories,  each  thirteen  metres  in  height  and  a  crenelated 
terrace.  The  ground-floor  line  is  five  metres  higher  than  the  bottom 
of  the  ditch,  and  from  this  interior  floor-line  level  as  far  as  the  pave- 
ment of  the  ditch,  the  cylinder  splays  out  conically. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


343 


Fig.  144. 

The  masonry  forming  a  solid  cylinder  for  the  height  of  the  two 
lower  stories  is  five  and  a  half  metres  thick  above  and  is  further 


Fig.  145. 


CONSTRUCTION.  345 

consolidated  by  interior  piers  forming  twelve  counterforts  carrying 
the  spandrels  of  the  vaults  (see  Donjon). 

Figure  145  gives  in  perspective  a  section  of  this  enormous  tower. 
The  lower  niches  are  cut  through  half-way  of  their  height  by  the 
arches  A,  making  out-of-the-way  places  for  storing  arms  and  tools. 
In  the  second  story,  the  niches  between  the  counterforts  rise  as  high 
as  the  vaulting  and  form  wall-arches  for  it.  In  the  third  story  the 
construction  might  be  made  lighter;  therefore  the  cylinder  is  set  back 


Fig.  146. 

on  the  interior  so  as  to  form  a  raised  gallery  B  enabling  a  larger 
number  of  people  to  assemble  in  the  upper  hall.  But  it  is  essential 
to  explain  the  remarkable  construction  of  this  gallery.  In  plan  a 
quarter  of  this  story  of  the  Keep  gives  Figure  146.  On  the  twelve 
piers  AB  are  carried  the  transverse  overhead  arches  C,  acting  as 
wall-arches  for  the  large  central  vault  D.  These  piers  AB  have 
their  two  lateral  faces  parallel.  From  the  points  b  spring  other 
transverse  arches  G  parallel  to  the  arches  C,  but  wider,  and  inter- 
secting at  their  spring  the  skewed  surfaces  of  the  piers.    On  the 


346 


MILITARY  CONSTRUCTIONS. 


transverse  arches  C  and  G  are  sprung  the  pointed  cradle-vaults  EF. 
Other  cradle-vaults  IK,  parallel  to  the  sides  L  of  the  twenty-four 
sided  polygon,  rest  upon  the  jambs  e,  on  the  faces  M  and  on  the  cor- 
belled supports  0.  The  perspective  section  looking  from  the  point 
P  gives  Figure  146a  which  explains  the  penetrations  of  the  arches 
and  vaults  into  the  skewed  vertical  surfaces.  The  plan  146  and  the 
perspective  section  146a  show  clearly  that  the  architects  of  the  early 
part  of  the  thirteenth  century  had  familiarized  themselves  with  the 
most  complicated  combinations  of  vaults  and  that  they  knew  per- 
fectly well  how  to  vary  the  disposition  of  them  according  to  the 
necessities  of  the  case.  We  are  no  longer  dealing  with  constructions. 
These  piers  which  broaden  out  so  as  to  bind  themselves  more 
strongly  to  the  outer  cylinder  and  buttress  it  by  means  of  the  vaults 
IK  of  plan  146,  show  very  intelligent  observation  of  the  effects 
which  can  be  produced  in  such  enormous  structures;  and,  as  a  matter 
of  fact,  although  the  engineer  Metezau  exploded  a  small  mine  in  the 
centre  of  the  stronghold  in  order  to  blow  it  up,  he  succeeded  only  in 
shooting  the  vaults  up  into  the  air  and  in  cracking  the  tower  in 
three  different  points  without  overthrowing  it.  The  enormous 
cylinder  acted  like  a  tube  charged  with  powder,  throwing  out  the 
vaults  as  if  they  were  grape-shot.  This  upper  gallery  carries  a  large 
open  chemin  de  ronde  D  (see  Fig.  145)  and  the  central  vault  was 
roofed  with  lead. 

At  E  (same  figure)  are  wooden  tie-beams  0.30  centimetres  square 
forming  a  double  dodecagon  at  each  story  and  joined  to  radiating 
ties  K,  also  of  wood  which  meet  at  the  centre  of  the  vault.  The 
three  central  vaults  are  each  composed  of  twelve  semicircular  groins 
with  wall-arches  whose  keys  are  placed  upon  the  level  of  the  central 
key;  the  triangles  between  the  twelve  groins  are  constructed  in 
accordance  with  the  ordinary  method.  Thus  each  one  of  the  twelve 
bays  being  very  narrow  relatively  to  the  diameter  of  the  vault,  it 
results  from  this  that  the  groins  only  carry  the  radiating  walls  up  to 
about  two-thirds  of  the  vault  and  that  this  central  construction  being 


CONSTRUCTION. 


347 


very  light  has,  nevertheless,  a  powerful  bracing  action  to  the  centre 
of  the  cylinder.  There  is  no  other  system  of  vaulting  outside  of  the 
Gothic  system  which  admits  such  favorable  treatment  and  this  should 


Fig.  1 46a. 

be  distinctly  recognized.  The  whole  structure  from  top  to  bottom  is 
made  of  dimension  stone  40  to  45  centimeters  height  of  beds,  with 
squared  faces,  roughly,  but  accurately  dressed.    In  proportion  as  the 


348  MILITARY  CONSTRUCTIONS. 

art  of  besieging  places  becomes  more  methodical,  military  construc- 
tions improve  in  character,  the  materials  employed  are  larger  and 
better  selected,  the  walls  thicker  and  better  laid,  the  backing  filled- 
in  with  more  care  and  the  mortar  better  mixed  and  stronger.  Dur- 
ing the  thirteenth  century  the  military  constructions  were  made  with 
the  greatest  care,  the  means  of  resistance  offered  to  attacks  singularly 
ample.  The  walls  of  small  ashlar  or  rubble  used  during  the  eleventh 
and  twelfth  centuries  are  given  up  as  a  general  thing ;  instead,  they 
are  made  of  hard  dressed  stone,  having  sufficient  bearing  into  the 
wall  so  as  not  to  be  easily  torn  out  by  the  crow-bars  or  pickaxes  of 

the  pioneers.  In  the  backing 
are  frequently  found  bonding 
courses  of  stones  and  relieving 
arches  buried  in  solid  masonry. 
The  parapets  are  composed  of 
through  stones,  the  exterior 
surfaces  admirably  fashioned. 
As  late  as  about  1240,  it  fre- 
quently happens  that  the 
courses  are  laid  on  very  thick 
beds  of  mortar  (0.04  to  0.05 
centimetres)  mixed  with 
spawls  of  hard  stone  (147)5 
but  this  proceeding  which  gave  to  the  beds  of  the  courses  great  ad- 
hesion on  account  of  the  quantity  of  mortar  used,1  had  the  incon- 
venience of  facilitating  the  introduction  of  the  pioneer's  crow-bar 
between  the  beds  to  detach  the  stones.  On  the  contrary,  dating 
from  this  epoch  the  beds  of  mortar  of  the  courses  forming  the  faces 
of  fortification  are  thin,  about  0.01  centimetres,  sometimes  less,  the 

!It  must  be  remarked  here  that  mortar  has  greater  cohesive  force  in  proportion 
to  the  mass  employed ;  a  very  thin  bed  of  mortar  is  burned  up  (as  the  masons 
say)  by  the  stone,  and  becomes  a  powdery  layer,  chipped  up,  without  adherence, 
because  in  placing  the  stones  these  rapidly  absorb  the  water  contained  in  the 
mortar,  and  this  drying  too  quickly  loses  its  quality. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


349 


edges  of  the  stone  are  sharp,  without  spawls  and  their  rough  faces 
frequently  form  projecting  bosses  so  as  to  mask  the  position  of  the 
beds  and  joints  (148).  It  was,  in  fact,  difficult  to  force  the  joints  of 
stones  thus  faced,  either  by  sapping,  by  battering  rams  or  any  of  the 
engines  made  to  beat  down  walls. 

Under  Philip  the  Bold,  and  Philip  the  Fair,  military  construc- 
tions fell  back  toward  antique  traditions.    We  have  seen  how  the 

constructors  of  the  Chateau  of 
Enguerrand  III,  at  C  o  u  c  y, 
adopted  for  the  towers  a  thick 
exterior  cylindrical  envelope, 
and  that  they  used  on  the  in- 
terior a  rather  light  treatment 
to  carry  vaults  or  flooring,  their 
slender  piers  enclosing  between 
them  cells  arched  over  with 
pointed  vaults;  they  seem  thus 
to  wish  to  reconcile  the  neces- 
sities of  defence  with  the  new 
methods  of  building  introduced 
by  the  non-ecclesiastical  archi- 
tects of  the  early  part  of  the 
thirteenth  century.  If  in  re- 
ligious and  civil  constructions 
these  novel  principles,  devel- 
oped at  the  outset  of  this  article, 
never  cease  to  progress  and 
develop  themselves  into  abuse 
and  affectation,  it  was  not  the 
same  with  military  constructions ;  the  architects  came  back  to 
simpler  designs,  to  a  more  homogeneous  system  of  construction.  At 
every  step  we  are  thus  obliged  to  come  to  a  stop  in  the  study  of  the 
art  of  building  of  the  artists  of  the  Middle  Ages  and  to  start  out  on 


Fig.  148. 


350 


MILITARY  CONSTRUCTIONS. 


a  new  road ;  for  the  logical  art  bends  itself  to  every  exigency,  to  all 
the  necessities  which  arise,  without  ever  attempting  to  impose  a 
routine.  At  the  very  moment  when  we  see  religious  edifices  exclude 
the  semicircular  arch  and  the  art  of  construction  abandon  itself  to 
an  excess  of  affectation  in  churches,  it  returns  in  military  construc- 
tions to  the  severest  forms,  to  the  concrete,  passive  system  of  build- 
ing, to  the  principles,  in  short,  so  well  developed  by  the  Romans. 
The  fortifications  of  the  City  of  Carcassonne,  built  at  the  end  of  the 
thirteenth  century  and  the  beginning  of  the  fourteenth,  give  us  a 
striking  example  of  this  revolution. 

As  we  shall  have  occasion  to  present  in  the  "  Dictionnaire,"  a 


Fig.  149. 

large  part  of  the  principal  schemes  and  details  of  these  fortifications,1 
we  will  here  limit  ourselves  to  giving  the  general  plans  and  details 
of  one  of  the  most  important  defences  of  this  enclosure,  in  order  to 
show  our  readers  what  the  art  of  military  construction  had  become 
under  Philip  the  Bold.  We  will  choose  the  principal  tower  of  this 
enclosure,  the  tower  called  du  Tresau,  which  yields  in  no  respect  to 
the  finest  antique  constructions  with  which  we  are  acquainted.  This 

1  See  also  the  "Archives  des  Monum.  Hist."  issued  under  the  auspices  of  the  min- 
istry of  state,  by  the  Commission  des  Monuments  Historiques .   (Gide,  publisher.) 


CONSTRUCTION. 


Sol 


tower  defends  one  of  the  projections  of  the  inner  enclosure.  It  is 
constructed  in  accordance  with  the  system  explained  in  our  Figure  142 
(6r),  that  is  to  say  its  two  stories  above  the  exterior  ground-line  are 
made  up,  on  the  side  exposed  to  attack,  of  niches  included  between 
the  interior  buttresses,  niches  at  the  extremity  of  which  are  pierced 
loop-holes  which  command  the  exterior.  Between  stories  these 
niches  buttress  one  another  like  those  in  the  tower  of  the  Chateau  of 
Coucy.  The  grade-line  of  the  fortification  is  seven  metres  above  the 
exterior  grade.  Figure  149  gives  the  plan  of  the  tower  du  Tresau, 
on  the  level  of  the  lowest  story  (the  cellar  for  those  within  the  forti- 


fications) on  the  same  level  as  the  outside  grade.  Under  this  story 
there  was  a  cellar  excavated  in  the  rock  faced  with  masonry  and 
vaulted,  access  down  to  which  was  given  by  the  cylindrical  stair- 
case in  the  corner  of  the  tower.  The  second  story  (150)  is  raised  a 
few  steps  above  the  level  of  the  ground  of  the  city.  This  ground- 
floor  and  this  second  story  (ground-floor  for  those  within  the  fortifi- 
cation) are  vaulted  by  means  of  transverse  arches,  wall-arches  and 
diagonal  arches  following  the  Gothic  method.  The  second  story 
(Fig.  150)  possesses  a  fireplace  G,  a  door  opening  on  the  parade,  a 
lodge  for  the  officer  in  charge,  and  privies  F,  corbelled  over  the 


Fig.  I  50. 


352 


MILITARY  CONSTRUCTIONS. 


outside.  The  third  story  (second  for  those  within  the  city)  [151] 
has  walls  unbroken  on  the  outside  so  as  to  strongly  bind  together  the 
lower  construction,  whose  circular  wall  is  pierced  with  buttressed 
niches  and  loop-holes ;  this  story  is  floored  over.  The  fourth  story 
(152)  represents  an  uncovered  cliemin  de  ronde  A,  and  in  the  centre 
a  garret  lighted  by  two  windows  in  the  gable  wall  D.  In  addition 
to  the  staircase  B,  which  rises  from  below,  there  is  also  starting  from 
the  cliemin  de  ronde,  a  second  staircase  B' ;  both  of  them  ascend  as 
far  as  the  top  of  the  two  watchtowers  which  flank  the  gable  D. 
Standing  with  your  back  to  the  gable  on  the  flooring  of  the  ground- 


Fig.  15  1. 

floor  (plan  Fig.  149),  and  looking  outwardly,  we  see  (153)  what  is 
the  interior  construction  of  this  tower.  We  suppose  the  vault  separ- 
ating the  lower  from  the  second  story  demolished  so  as  to  show  the 
disposition  of  the  interior  niches  forming  loop-holes,  alternating  and 
carrying  solids  over  voids  in  order  to  command  all  points  of  the 
horizon  without  and  also  to  cut  the  piers  and  avoid  vertical  ruptures, 
conformably  to  the  system  adopted  in  the  towers  of  Coucy,  explained 
above.  The  simplicity  of  this  construction,  its  solidity,  the  care  with 
which  the  faces  are  finished  with  beautiful  cut  stone,  both  within  and 
without,  well  indicate  the  attention  which  the  architects  of  the  end 
of  the  thirteenth  century  gave  to  the  execution  of  these  constructions, 


CONSTRUCTION. 


353 


how  they  sacrificed  all  for  the  needs  of  defence,  how  they  knew  when 
to  yield  their  methods  to  different  kinds  of  construction. 

In  examining  the  fortifications  raised  about  the  City  of  Carcas- 
sonne, under  Philip  the  Bold,  we  should  hardly  imagine,  a  few  years 
later,  that  they  would  erect,  in  the  same  town,  the  choir  of  the 
Church  of  St.  Nazaire,  of  which  we  have  presented  several  portions 
to  our  readers. 

The  tower  du  Tresau  is  covered  with  a  steep  roof  forming  a  coni- 
cal hip  on  the  side  toward  the  country  and,  on  the  side  toward  the 
town,  finishes  against  a  gable  end  pierced  with  windows  lighting 

the  various  stories.  If  we  make  a 
transverse  section  of  the  tower  look- 
ing at  the  gable  end,  we  have  Figure 
154. 

In  examining  the  plans,  we  see  that 
this  gable  wall  has  but  little  thickness 
relative  to  its  height.  But,  on  this 
side,  it  is  necessary  only  to  close  up 
the  gorge  of  the  tower  and  this  wall 
is,  moreover  solidly  maintained  in  its 
vertical  plane  by  the  two  watchtowers 
FF,  which  by  their  base  and  their 
weight  present  two  points  of  support  of  great  solidity.  The  junction 
of  the  roof  with  the  gable  is  well  sheltered  by  these  steps,  which 
form  parapet  walls  on  the  interior  face  and  which  facilitate  the  in- 
spection of  the  higher  portions  of  the  tower.  The  roofing  (the 
steepness  of  which  is  indicated  by  the  dotted  line  IK)  rests  upon 
the  two  supports  K,  absolutely  separating  the  chemin  de  ronde  F 
from  the  central  apartment.  At  the  level  of  the  rampart,  the  chemin 
de  ronde  G  encircles  the  construction  on  the  side  of  the  city,  whose 
grade  is  at  CD,  as  that  without  is  at  AB. 

Moreover,  the  care  employed  in  making  a  general  plan  of  these 
military  edifices  is  manifested  even  in  the  least  details.    We  notice 


354 


MILITARY  CONSTRUCTIONS. 


Fig.  I  53. 


Fig.  I  54. 


356 


MILITARY  CONSTRUCTIONS. 


everywhere  the  indications  of  a  keen  observation  and  a  consummate 
experience.  So  without  enlarging  too  much  upon  the  details  which 
have  their  place  in  the  articles  of  the  "  Dictionnaire  "  we  shall  limit 
ourselves  to  pointing  out  one  of  the  interior  dispositions  of  the  struct- 
ure of  the  fortifications  of  Carcassone  at  the  end  of  the  thirteenth 
century.  Some  of  the  towers,  the  most  exposed  to  the  efforts  of  the 
besieger,  are  provided  on  their  anterior  part  with  projecting  beaks 
intended  to  keep  the  pioneers  at  a  distance  and  to  offer  a  strong 


4 


Fig.  15  5. 

resistance  to  the  blows  of  the  battering  ram  (see  "Architecture  Mili- 
taire,  Tour").  Notice,  then,  in  this  particular  case  how  the  bonding 
of  the  courses  is  arranged  (155). 

The  joints  of  the  stones  on  the  anterior  portion  of  the  tower  are 
not  drawn  normal  to  the  curve,  but  at  an  angle  of  45°  relatively  to 
the  axis  AB;  so  that  the  action  of  the  battering  ram  on  the  project- 
ing beak  (the  most  projecting  and  consequently  the  most  attackable 
point)  is  neutralized  by  the  direction  of  these  joints,  which  carry  off 
the  effect  of  the  blows  to  the  junction  points  of  the  tower  with  the 


CONSTRUCTION. 


:;:>7 


neighboring  walls.  If  the  besieger  employs  sappers  after  having 
undermined  the  beak  or  even  beyond  it,  he  strikes  joints  in  the 
masonry  which  do  not  lead  him  to  the  centre  of  the  tower,  but  give 
him  a  long  and  severe  task,  for  he  has  to  lift  out  with  a  crow-bar 
every  block  which  runs  obliquely,  and  he  cannot  dislodge  them  as 
easily  as  if  they  were  cut  wedge-shaped.  In  our  diagram  we  have 
indicated  the  bonding  of  two  courses  by  full  and  dotted  lines. 


Fig.  I  56. 

While  civil  and  religious  architecture  loads  itself  down  with 
superfluous  ornaments,  while  construction  becomes  more  and  more 
refined  during  the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth  centuries,  military  con- 
struction on  the  contrary,  uses  each  day  safer  methods,  simpler 
means  of  obtaining  greater  resistance.  The  military  construc- 
tion of  the  end  of  the  fourteenth  century  and  the  beginning  of  the 
fifteenth,  universally  employs  semicircular  and  segmental  arches; 
the  bonding  is  done  with  particular  care ;  the  masonry  of  the  rough 


358 


MILITARY  CONSTRUCTIONS. 


walls  is  excellent  and  they  are  well  filled-in,  which  is  rare  in  religious 
constructions.  All  useless  expense  is  avoided.  Thus,  for  instance, 
the  arches  of  the  vaults  which,  in  the  thirteenth  century  and  again 
in  the  fourteenth  are  carried  upon  corbels,  penetrate  into  the  walls, 
as  Figure  156  shows.1 

The  skewbacks  of  the  transverse  arch  are  enveloped  in  the 
courses  of  the  interior  facing  of  the  tower.  There  are  no  more  wall- 
arches  :  with  good  reason  this  member  was  considered  superfluous. 
The  first  voussoir  A  of  the  haunches  of  the  arch  is  cut  upon  the  face 
of  the  wall;  a  simple  groove  cut  into  this  wall  receives  the  other 
stones  which  form  the  spandrels  of  the  vaults.  While  the  details  of 
construction  grow  simple  and  less  expensive,  the  bonding  becomes 
better,  the  materials  are  better  chosen,  with  regard  to  the  place 
which  they  are  to  occupy  ;  the  facings  are  finished  with  extreme  care 
even  down  to  the  foundations,  for  it  is  essential  to  leave  no  point  of 
vantage  for  the  work  of  the  miner.  If  rock  is  built  upon,  it  is 
benched  off  with  all  the  finish  usually  given  to  the  bedding  of  cut- 
stone ;  if  the  rock  presents  irregularities,  fissures,  they  are  made 
good  with  good  courses.  At  all  points  there  is  recognizable  that 
watchfulness,  that  attention,  that  scrupulousness,  which  are,  among 
constructions,  the  usual  evident  signs  of  a  very  perfect  art,  a  syste- 
matic method. 

Modern  artillery  cut  short  the  architects  at  the  moment  when 
they  had  pushed  to  its  utmost  limits  the  theory  and  the  practice  of 
military  construction.  As  opposed  to  this,  these  refinements  of  de- 
fence became  useless  ;  .it  was  necessary  to  offer  to  this  new  means 
of  destruction  enormous  masses  of  masonry  or  earthworks.  The 
cannon  knocked  over  the  covered  parapets  and  cunningly  devised 
machicoulations,  threw  down  the  ramparts  by  undermining  them  at 
the  bottom  and  put  a  stop  to  the  employment  of  those  ingenious 
combinations  contrived  to  resist  attack  at  close  quarters.  Neverthe- 

1  From  the  towers  of  the  Chateau  of  Pierrefonds;  beginning  of  the  fifteenth 
century. 


CONSTRUCTION. 


359 


less,  such  was  the  strength  of  many  of  the  fortresses  of  the  fourteenth 
and  fifteenth  centuries  that  systematic  sieges  have  frequently  been 
required  to  make  a  breech  into  and  reduce  them.  In  order  not  to 
extend  any  further  this  already  very  long  article,  we  refer  our 
readers  for  the  study  of  the  details  of  fortification  in  the  Middle 
Ages,  to  the  words  Architecture  militaire,  Boulevard,  Chateau,  Cour- 
tine,  Creneau,  Donjon,  Echauguette,  Machicoulis,  Porte,  Siege,  Tour. 


t 


INDEX. 


Abaci   101 

Abacus   33,  65,  G7,  99 

Abutments   89,  104 

Absolute  judgment   280 

Active  forces   310 

Agrigentum,  Basilica  at   207 

Aisles   23 

Aisne  Valley,  Stone  of   231 

Air   280 

Air-intakes   295 

Aix-la-Chapelle   5 

Alsace   305 

Amiens   229 

Amiens,  Cathedral  of..  5C>,  223,  232,  236 

Amiens,  Nave,  Cathedral  of   341 

Anchors  of  iron  cramps   237 

Ancones   121 

Andelis,  Fortress  of   339 

Angers,  Hospital  of   292 

Anglers   148 

Anglo-Norman   150, 151 

Anglo-Norman  builders.   158 

ANGLO-NORMAN  method   154 

Anjou   150 

Anstrude,  Stone  of  231 

Antiquity   11 

AP3E   96,175 

Aquitania   159, 154 

Arch,  Broken   50 

Arch,  Pointed   41, 42, 81, 89,  286 


Arch,  Semicircular   69 

Arch-stones   20 

Arch,  Tierce-point   51,  69 

Arch,  Transverse   63,  358 

Arches,  Diagonal   62, 124 

Arches,  Discharging   334 

Arches,  Ogival   48 

Arches,  Romanesque,  semicircu- 
lar and  transverse   40 

Arches,  Spreading  of,  in  Italy. . . .  313 

Arches,  Transverse  

  20,  27,30,37,41,46,62,  121 

Arches,  Wall   30,  62 

Architecture   1, 4, 10, 12, 29 

Architecture,  Burgundian   44 

Architecture,  for  our  own  time.  113 

Architecture,  Greek   13 

Architecture,  Italian   61 

Architecture  in  Italy   312 

Architecture  of  the  Romans   216 

Architecture,  Roman   2, 13 

Architects   13,  57 

Architects,  French   262 

Architects,  Ingenious   10 

Architects,  Mediaeval. . .  281,  284,  298 

Architects,  Norman   140 

Architects  of  Burgundy   no 

Architects  of  Champagne...  116,254 
Architects  of  French  Renais- 
sance   163 


362 


INDEX. 


Architects  of  the  Middle  Ages...  257 

Architects  of  Picardy   228 

Architects,  Romanesque.. .  19,  27,  29 
Architects  of  the  Twelfth 

Century   72,  98,  115 

Archivolt   100 

Archivolts   21 

Artillery,  Modern   358 

Ashlar   17,  72 

Ashlar,  Scappled   17 

Atreus,  Treasury  of   42 

Augustus   11 

Aut  un,  Cathedral  of   43 

Auvergne,  Church  of   96 

Auxerre  Cathedral   200 


Basilicas   3 

Basilicas  in  Borne   313 

Beaune,  Church  of   43 

Beauty   81 

Beauvais   72, 147 

Beauvais,  Cathedral  of . .  217,  233,  239 

Beauvais,  Choir  of   231,  237 

Beauvoisis   87,205,254 

Belt-course,  Stone   299 

Bethisy,  Chateaux  of  326 

Beton   2 

Blavelincourt,  Silexstone  from.  233 

Bohemia   262 

Bretons   163 

Bressummer   320 

Builders   77 

Builders,  Gothic   49,  63,  82,  89 

Builders,  Lay  School  of   61 

Builders,  Mediaeval  311 

Builders,  Middle  Thirteenth 

Century   256 

Builders  of  the  Twelfth  Century.  88 
Builders,  Romanesque..  

  20,23,25,33,42 

Buildings,  Construction  of   57 

Building  Nations   29 

Building,  New  system  of   19 

Buildings,  Roman   19 

Building-stone   170 

Buildings,  Superintendence  of.. .  9 

burgundian   167 

burgundians   253 

Burgundy        40,  43, 138, 147,  200,  240 


Burgundy,  Duke  of   326 

Burgundy,  Materials  of   231 

Buttresses   287 

Buttresses,  Exterior   21 

Buttress,  Hollow   193 

Byzantium   5 


Cabins,  Wooden   16 

Cast-iron   80, 194 

Caracalla,  Baths  of   313 

Carcassonne,  Fortifications  of 

the  City  of   350 

Carlovingian  Epoch   288 

Cathedral  of  Paris   93 

Capital   34 

Capitals   33 

Centre,  Permanent   20 

Centres,  Permanent   30 

Century,  Eleventh..  7, 18, 22, 30, 35, 44 

Century,  Fifteenth   287,  325 

Century,  Fourteenth   161,287,325 

Century,  Nineteenth   11 

Century,  Ninth   7 

Century,  Sixteenth   89, 163 

Century,  Tenth   58 

Century,  Thirteenth  

  12,  137, 150,  158,  175,  248 

Century,  Thirteenth,  Middle  of. .  254 

Century,  Thirteenth   287 

Century,  Twelfth   12, 15, 18,  40, 

43,  50,  54,  57,  61,  77,  84,  93,  96,  147,  286 
Champagne  

  43,  72,  87, 138, 147,  200,  242,  275 

Champagne,  Architects  of   253 

Channel   140 

Charite-sur-Loire   18 

Charite-sur-Loire,  Church  of . .  43 

Charlemagne   4 

Chimneys   289 

Chateaux   279 

Chiselling  172 

Choir  of  St.  Remy  at  Rheims   87 

Christianity   10 

Charles  V   330 

Charles  V,  Reign  of   325 

Charles  VI,  Reign  of   325 

Chartres,  Hospital  of   292 

Church,  Romanesque   35 

j  Civil  Construction   274 


INDEX. 


363 


Cluny   18 

Cluny,  A  house  at   276 

Cluny,  Order  of   15 

Cu  ny,  Town  of   277,  288 

Code  feudal   12 

Coliseum   313 

Column   65,  81 

COLUMN,  Monocylindrical   98 

Column,  Roman    33 

Columns   33 

Columns,  Monocylindrical  91, 114 

Concretion,  Perfect   19 

Confreres  in  Italy   60 

Console   126 

Construction   1,  12,  14 

Construction,  Architectural   1 

Construction,  Gothic   79,  82,  92 

Construction,  Homogeneous  ...  184 

Construction  of  churches   339 

Construction  of  the  Middle  Ages.  216 

Construction,  Process  of   70 

Construction,  Roman          2,  3,  6,  46 

Constructions   87 

Constructions,  French.   166 

Constructors,  Carlovingian   5 

Constructors,  Romanesque. . .  30,  70 
Corbelled  constructions,  System 

Of   309 

Corbel   34 

Corbels   301,  319 

COUCY,  Chateau  of   326,  339,  349 

Coucy,  Hall  of  the  Chateau   328 

Com  v,  Keep  of   342 

Cradle-vault,  Roman  semicir- 
cular  90 

Cramp-irons   214 

Crepy,  Chateaux  of   326 

Croissy,  Stone  from   232 

Crouy,  Stone  of   231 

Curve,  Diagonal   38 

Curve  of  Pressures   88 


Da  Vinci,  Leonardo   50 

Delorme,  Philibert   326 

Destruction  of  castles   292 

Details   119 

Developments   175 

Divergence   38 

Dijon,  Materials  of   231 


Dodecagon   1C6 

Dome   153 

Doorway,  in  re-entrant  angle  322 

Doorway,  Problem  to  pierce  a.. . .  322 

Dormer,  Sashes   290 

Dormer,  "Windows  328 

Dornecy,  Stone  of   231 

Dwelling-houses   282 

Edifice  of  Twelfth  Century   168 

Elasticity,  Principle  of   20 

Ellipsoids   30 

Ely,  Cathedral  of   149, 158 

Empire,  Roman   5 

England   137, 153 

ENGl -errand  III   339,342 

Episcopal  residences   289 

Episcopate   61 

Equilibrium   80,  104,  299 

Equilibrium,  System  of   311 

Eu,  Church  of   149 


Ferte-Bernard   163 

Ferte-Milon,  Chateaux  of   326 

Fifteenth  Century,  Military  Con- 
structions  357 

Fillet-ridge   188 

Filling-stones  »   149 

Floors   289 

Floors  considered  as  braces  300 

Floral  ornaments   163 

Flues   290 

Flying-buttress —  70, 103,  177.  L84 
Flying-buttresses,  at  Beauvais.  234 

Forces,  Equilibrium  of   12 

Formulas   79 

Fourteenth  Century   272 

Fourteenth  Century,  Military 

Constructions   357 

Frame,  Elastic   46 

France   43,  50,  138, 153 

France,  Fourteenth  Century   272 

France,  South   262 

Francis  1   290 

Frontfroide   14!) 

Gaillard,  Chateau  of   339 

Gallo-Roman   3 


INDEX. 


364 

Gallo-Roman  edifices   43 

Gallo-Roman  system   274 

Gaul   3,5 

Gauls   14,  274 

Geometry   81 

Germany   274 

Girders   298 

Gothic   29,  44 

Gothic  architects  253 

Gothic  architecture   21G 

Gothic  builders   239 

Gothic  building   217 

Gothic  building,  outside  of   259 

Gothic  epoch,   in  civil  archi- 
tecture  305 

Gothic  system  of  construction   148 

Gothic  system  of  vaults   122 

Greek  architecture   21G 

Greeks   2, 13,  42,  298 

Grille   13 

Groins,  Diagonal   27 

Groins,  Projecting   46 

Gun-powder   50 


"  HALLES  "   290 

Hand-work   170 

Haunches  of  flying-buttress   186 

Henri  II,   Hall  of— Fontaine- 

bleau  . . . ,   289 

HOH-KoENiGSBOURG,near  Schele- 

stadt   303 

Houses  of  Champagne   319 

Hungary   262 


Ile-de-France 

....  40,  44,  72,  116,  147,  153/205,  253 

Imperfect  balance   189 

Impost   34 

Ingenious  application  of  Gothic 

vaults   199 

Instincts   79 

Intellectual  laziness   60 

Intrados   145 

Italy   5 

Italy,  Architecture  of   312 

Italy,  Mediaeval  edifices  in   312 


Jews   12 


KEY-pendants   163 

Keystone   26 


Laboring  class   85 

Labor  of  yesterday   11 

Langres,  Cathedral  of   98, 109 

Laversine,  Stone  of   231 

Law   88 

Laws,  Modern   12 

Laws  of  symmetry   285 

Lay  architects   207 

Levies  of  men   14 

Liberty,  Civil   12 

Light   280 

Limestone   172 

Limestones  of  Chatillon-s  ur- 

Seine   231 

Logical  art   350 

Loire   148 

Lombards   4 

Looseness  of  masonry   76 

Lords,  Feudal   13 

Louis,  Duke  of  Orleans   326 

Louis  XIV   290 

Louis  XII   290 

Louvre,  at  Paris   330 

Maine   150 

Maintenon,  Aqueduct  of  216 

Maisnee   279 

Make-shift   148 

Manceaux   163 

Mans   163 

Mansard   290 

Masonry,  Homogeneous   3 

Master-builder,  at  Beauvais...  231 

Masters   18 

Master- workman,  Media? val   317 

Materials   167 

Mediaeval  dwellings  277 

Medicine   13 

Merovingian  period   274 

Merovingians   3 

Methods,  Roman   10 

Mezzanine  stories   281 

Middle  Ages..  10, 11, 84, 85, 167, 240, 335 
Middle  Ages,  Architects..  257 


INDEX. 


365 


Middle  Ages,  Architecture  of  the 

  13,318 

Middle  Ages,  Art  of  building   349 

Middle  Ages,  Builders  of  the   14 

Middle  Ages,  Clergy  of  the   13 

Middle  Ages,  Construction  of —  318 

Military  constructions   333 

MILITARY  construction,  Thir- 
teenth Century   348 

Military  edifices,  General  plan  of.  353 
Minerva,  Temple  of,  at  Athens. .  194 

Mining..   336 

Modern  industry  315 

Monks   17 

Montargis,  Castle  of.  289 

Montbard,  Stone  of  231 

Montesquieu   31G 

Mont  St.  Michel,  Halls  of  the 

Abbey  of   292 

Monuments,  Carlovingian   7 

Mortar   337,348 

Mouliherne,  Church  of   154 


Narbonne,  Cathedral  of   272 

Naves   23 

Nesle,  Church  of   64 

Neutralizing  of  thrusts   101 

Nismes,  Amphitheatre   94 

Normans   138, 163, 166 

NORMANS,  Military  works  of   333 

Normandy   43,  72 

Normandy,  during  Middle  Ages . .  338 

Notre  Dame,  Apse  at  Dijon   175 

Notre  Dame,  at  Amiens          225,  233 

Notre  Dame,  at  Chalons          104, 113 

Notre  Dame,  at  Paris   59 

Notre  Dame,  at  Chalons-sur- 

Marne   87,  93,  169,  198 

Notre  Dame,  at  Clermont   96 

Notre  Dame,  at  Dijon   135, 194 

Notre  Dame,  at  Issoire   96 

Notre  Dame,  at  Noyon   87 

Notre  Dame,  at  Paris.  87,  218,  233,  240 
Notre  Dame,  at  Saint  Nectaire. . .  96 

Notre  Dame,  at  Saint  Savin   96 

Notre  Dame,  at  Senlis   87 

Notre  Dame,  at  Sens   87 

Notre  Dame  du  Port   96, 101 

Notre  Dame-la-Grande,  at  Poi- 
tiers  334 


Notre  Dame,  Nave  at  Dijon. 
Noyon,  Cathedral  of  


..  182 
69,  73 


Oise,  limestone   207 

Oise  Valley,  Stone  of   231 

Orders,  Religious   14 

Ourscamp,  Abbey  of   292 


Palais-de-Justice,  at  Paris   282 

Palatine   313 

Panta leon,  Jacques   241 

Pantheon,  at  Pome   194 

Paris,  Cathedral  at   207, 210 

Paris,  Cathedral  choir   113 

Paris,  Cathedral  of   217,  272 

Parthenon   13 

Party  spirit   12 

Pendentives   5,  58,  325 

Pericles   11 

Perigord   148 

Perigueux   58 

Period,  Carlovingian  4,  6 

Peterborough   139 

Peterborough,  Cathedral  of —  138 

Pharmacy   13 

PHiLir  the  Bold   349 

Philip  the  Fair   349 

Picardy   72,  205,  254,  275 

Picturesque  307 

Pier   301 

Pier,  Cylindrical   78 

Pierrefonds,  Chateaux  of. . .  326,  358 

Piers   69 

Pillars,  Detached   68 

Pillars,  Monolithic   182 

Pinnacle   184 

Plan  of  an  edifice   63 

Pointed  arch,  Origin  of  the   39 

Poiton,  Church  of   96 

Portico   97 

Posts  of  timber   109 

Preventive  method   102,  104 

Principle  of  equilibrium  216 

Principles   15, 16 

Principles,  Development  of   57 

Prismatic  pier   78 

Progress  —   92 


366 


INDEX. 


Projecting  beaks   356 

Purlins,  Stone   302 


Quarrying   171 


Rationalists    258 

Reason   29 

Re-entrant  angles   280 

Reformers  '.   1G 

Regard  for  appearances   86 

Religion  in  Sixteenth  Century. . .  308 

Renaissance   61, 165 

Requisition   14 

Resistance  of  materials   199 

Resistance,  Passive   2 

Retrograde  minds   60,  315 

Rheims,  Cathedral  at   56,341 

Richard,  Cceur-de-Lion   339 

RiEUX,Apseof   202 

Rieux,  Church  of   201,242 

Rigidity   109 

Roads,  Roman   14 

Roman  architecture   206 

Roman  arrangement   18 

Romanesque  period   58,  284 

Roman  method   17 

Roman  monument,  To  measure  a..  318 
Roman  principles  of  construction.  216 

Rome   5 

Rome,  Ancient   4 

Romans   2,  14,  42,  83,  96,  239,  288 

Roofs   284 

Rubble   17 

Rubble- work   6,  334 


Saint  e  Chapelle-du-Palais,  at 

Paris   177,240,254 

Saint-Denis,  Church  of   44 

Saint  Gervais,  at  Paris   318 

Saint  Leu  d'  Esserent  (Oise)   115 

Saint  Remy,  of  Rheims   106,  202 

Salle  des  Preux   328 

Santa  Sophia,  Church  of   5 

Sapping   336 

Saulieu,  Church  of   43 

Saumur   153 


Scantling   7 

Science   312 

Seekers,  Primitive   18 

Seine,  limestone   207 

Semi  r,  Materials  of   231 

Settlement   ill 

Skew-backs.  .  46, 100, 120, 123, 301, 358 

Society,  Mediaeval   291 

Soffites   143 

Soissons   72 

Soissons,  Halls  of  the  Abbey   292 

Sorcerers   12 

Spain   262 

Spandrels   301 

Stability,  Absolute   19,  20 

Staircases   330 

Stairs,  Romanesque  period   284 

Statics   12,  23 

St.  Benedict,  Order  of   16 

St.  Jean-des- Vignes,  Halls  of   292 

St.  Marie  de  Breteuil,  Abbey  of. . .  292 
St.  Nazaire,  at  Carcassonne,  Choir 

of  260 

St.  Nazaire,  at  Carcassonne   262 

St.  Nazaire,  Carcassonne,  Choir 

arch   265 

St.  Nazaire,  Carcassonne,  Choir 

pier   266 

St.  Nazaire  of  Carcassonne   269 

St.  Nazaire,  Church  of   353 

St.  Nicaise,  at  Rheims   242 

Stone   16 

Stone-cutters  •   340 

St.  Remy  of  Rheims   93 

St.  Simon,  Duke  of   307 

St.  Stephen,  Cathedral  at  Auxerre.  195 

St.  Urbain   248 

St.  Urbain,  of  Troyes   259,  269 

St.  Urbain,  Architect  of   251 

St.  Urbain,  Buttress  of   244 

St.  Urbain,  Chancel  of   249 

St.  Urbain,  Church  of,  at  Troyes. .  241 
St.  Urbain,  Gallery  in  the  Church 

of   249 

St.  Urbain  stone   251 

Superhuman  being   83 

Support,  Points  of   19 

Tailors   325 


INDEX. 


367 


Therms   33 

Theseus,  Temple  of   13 

Thrust   89 

Thrusts   103, 122 

Thrusts,  Contrary   78 

Thrusts  into  vacant  space   10G 

Thrusts,  Oblique   2 

To-day   11 

TONITERRE,  Quarries  of   251 

Tonnerre,  Stone  of   243 

Tower  du  Tresau   350 

Triangles,  Concave   46 

Triforium   100,179 

Truth   319 

Tufa   19 

Twelfth  Century,  Defensive 
works  of   334 

URBAIK  IV  at  Yiterbo   l'41 

Useful  to-day   11 

Vault   37,  62 

Vault,  A  hall  :   128 

Vault,  Anglo-Nonnan   157 

Vault,  Barrel   5 

Vault,  Cradle   20 

Vault,  Groined   24,  33 

Vault,  Groined  or  intersecting. . .  5 

Vault,  Hemispherical   5 

Vault,  Roman   20 


Vault,  Romanesque  groined   28 

Vault,  Roman  groined   27,  153 

Vault,  Simple  groined   94 

Vaults   5,40,46,88 

Vaults,  Anglo-Norman   140 

Vaults,  Construction  of   34 

Vaults,  Cradle   23,  27,  43 

Vaults,  Diagonal  arch   123 

Vaults,  Diagonal  arched   63 

Vaults,  Gothic   68, 119 

Vaults,  Groined   23,  30 

Vaults,  in  civil  constructions —  299 

Vaults,  Roman   19 

Vaults,  Roman  groined   24 

Vaults,  Thrust  of   20 

Versed  sine   143 

VEZELAY   18,  30,  35,  44,  46 

Vezelav,  Church  of.   69.147 

Vezelay,  Porch  of   44 

Villae   285 

Voltaire   316 

VOUSSOIRS   53,63,  88,  120,  147,  358 


Wall  arches   33,  46,  67 

Western  builders   154 

Westminster   149 

Wheelbarrow  290 

William  the  Conqueror   333 

Willis's  memoirs   162 

Windows   289 

Wood   16 


GETTY  CENTER  LIBRARY 


3  3125  00111  3337 


